Frontline Learning Research <p>Frontline Learning Research (FLR) welcomes risk-taking and explorative studies that provide input for theoretical, empirical and/or methodological renewal within the field of research on learning and instruction. The journal offers a distinctive opening for foundational research and an arena for studies that promote new ideas, methodologies or discoveries. Read about what is frontline under <a href="" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Aims and scope</a></p> en-US <p>FLR adopts the Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs Creative Common License (BY-NC-ND). That is, Copyright for articles published in this journal is retained by the authors with, however, first publication rights granted to the journal. By virtue of their appearance in this open access journal, articles are free to use, with proper attribution, in educational and other non-commercial settings.</p> (Nina B. Dohn) (Havva Akcaoglu) Wed, 08 Feb 2023 08:15:12 -0800 OJS 60 Examining Classroom Contexts in Support of Culturally Diverse Learners’ Engagement: An Integration of Self-Regulated Learning and Culturally Responsive Pedagogical Practices. <p>Research shows that culturally diverse students are often disengaged in multicultural classrooms. To address this challenge, literatures on self-regulated learning (SRL) and culturally responsive teaching (CRT) both document practices that foster engagement, although from different perspectives. This study examined how classroom teachers at schools that enrol students from diverse cultural communities on the West Coast of Canada built on a Culturally Responsive Self-Regulated Learning Framework to design complex tasks that integrated SRL pedagogical practices (SLPPs) and culturally-responsive pedagogical practices (CRPPs) to support student engagement. Two elementary school teachers and their 43 students (i.e., grades 4 and 5) participated in this study. We used a multiple, parallel case study design that embedded mixed methods approaches to examine how the teachers integrated SRLPPs and CRPPs into complex tasks; how culturally diverse students engaged in each teacher’s task; and how students’ experiences of engagement were related to their teachers' practices. We generated evidence through video-taped classroom observations, records of classroom practices, students’ work samples, a student self-report, and teacher interviews. Overall findings showed: (1) that teachers were able to build on the CR-SRL framework to guide their design of an CR-SRL complex task; (2) benefits to students’ engagement when those practices were present; and (3) dynamic learner-context interactions in that student engagement was situated in features of the complex task that were present on a given day. We close by highlighting implications of these findings, limitations, and future directions.</p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <p>&nbsp;</p> Aloysius C. Anyichie, Deborah L. Butler, Nancy E. Perry, Samson M. Nashon Copyright (c) 2023 Frontline Learning Research Tue, 14 Feb 2023 00:00:00 -0800 Modeling and Measuring Domain-Specific Quantitative Reasoning in Higher Education Business and Economics <p>Quantitative reasoning is considered a crucial prerequisite for acquiring domain-specific expertise in higher education. To ascertain whether students are developing quantitative reasoning, validly assessing its development over the course of their studies is required. However, when measuring quantitative reasoning in an academic study program, it is often confounded with other skills. Following a situated approach, we focus on quantitative reasoning in the domain of business and economics and define domain-specific quantitative reasoning primarily as a skill and capacity that allows for reasoned thinking regarding numbers, arithmetic operations, graph analyses, and patterns in real-world business and economics tasks, leading to problem solving. As many studies demonstrate, well-established instruments for assessing business and economics knowledge like the Test of Understanding College Economics (TUCE) and the Examen General para el Egreso de la Licenciatura (EGEL) contain items that require domain-specific quantitative reasoning skills. In this study, we follow a new approach and assume that assessing business and economics knowledge offers the opportunity to extract domain-specific quantitative reasoning as the skill for handling quantitative data in domain-specific tasks. We present an approach where quantitative reasoning – embedded in existing measurements from TUCE and EGEL tasks – will be empirically extracted. Hereby, we reveal that items tapping domain-specific quantitative reasoning constitute an empirically separable factor within a Confirmatory Factor Analysis and that this factor (domain-specific quantitative reasoning) can be validly and reliably measured using existing knowledge assessments. This novel methodological approach, which is based on obtaining information on students’ quantitative reasoning skills using existing domain-specific tests, offers a practical alternative to broad test batteries for assessing students’ learning outcomes in higher education.</p> Susanne Schmidt, Olga Zlatkin-Troitschanskaia, Richard J. Shavelson Copyright (c) 2023 Frontline Learning Research Wed, 22 Mar 2023 00:00:00 -0700 What do students think about differentiation and within-class achievement grouping? <p><em>Differentiation and achievement grouping are frequently implemented practices to adapt education to students’ varying educational needs based on achievement level. Potential didactical and socioemotional advantages and disadvantages of these practices have been discussed in the literature. However, little is known about the perspective of students themselves. This study examined how students (N = 428) perceived differentiation and within-class homogeneous achievement grouping in primary mathematics education, with attention for potential differences between students of diverse achievement levels. Students of Grades 1, 3 and 5 completed a questionnaire about various differentiated mathematics activities and (if applicable) within-class achievement grouping. In line with the didactical perspective on differentiation, extended instruction and less difficult tasks were appreciated most by low-achieving students whereas more difficult tasks were appreciated most by high-achieving students. Students of all achievement groups had largely positive attitudes about achievement grouping and about their own achievement group. However, some differences between achievement groups were found, with less favourable results for students placed in low achievement groups. Students’ responses to open-ended questions provided additional insights into the reasons behind students’ evaluations of differentiation and achievement grouping. Differences between grade levels were also explored.</em></p> Emilie Prast, Kim Stroet, Arnout Koornneef, Tom F. Wilderjans Copyright (c) 2023 Frontline Learning Research Thu, 23 Mar 2023 00:00:00 -0700