华东师范大学学报(教育科学版)

华东师范大学学报(教育科学版) ›› 2023, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (1): 50-59.doi: 10.16382/j.cnki.1000-5560.2023.01.005

• 专题：潜在类别模型在教育研究中的应用 • 上一篇    下一篇

家长教育卷入类型与中学生学科素养：基于PISA 2018中国香港及澳门数据的潜在类别分析

黄声华1, 尹弘飚2, 靳玉乐1   

  1. 1. 深圳大学教育学部，深圳 518060
    2. 香港中文大学教育学院，香港 999077
  • 出版日期:2023-01-01 发布日期:2022-12-29
  • 基金资助:
    国家社会科学基金“十四五”规划教育学重点课题“我国义务教育学业负担综合治理研究”（AHA210009）；深圳市教育科学 “十四五”规划重点资助课题“青少年社会情绪能力发展现状与多维提升机制研究”（ZDZZ21001）

The Types of Parental Involvement and Secondary School Students’ Subject Literacy: A Latent Class Analysis Based on the Data of Hong Kong and Macao in PISA 2018

Shenghua Huang1, Hongbiao Yin2, Yule Jin1   

  1. 1. Faculty of Education, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen 518060, China
    2. Faculty of Education, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong 999077, China
  • Online:2023-01-01 Published:2022-12-29

RichHTML

69

PDF

695

摘要：

分析家长教育卷入的类型特征及其与中学生学科素养之间的关系具有重要意义。基于PISA 2018中国香港和澳门的数据，本研究采用潜在类别分析（LCA）识别出家长教育卷入类型的四个潜在类别，并探讨人口学变量对潜在类别的影响、潜在类别与中学生学科素养（数学、阅读、科学和跨文化素养）的关系。结果表明，地区、学生性别、年级、家庭经济社会文化地位和家长对孩子的学业期望对潜在类别有不同程度的显著影响；不同潜在类别的中学生学科素养表现存在显著差异。家长低度卷入组（C1, 39.1%）的数学、阅读、科学素养优于其他组别，但跨文化素养表现一般。家长繁忙高度卷入组（C2, 33.3%）的阅读素养略优于家长广泛高度卷入组（C3, 23.1%），但其他三方面的素养均弱于家长广泛高度卷入组。家长限制中度卷入组（C4, 4.5%）的数学、阅读、科学素养弱于其他组别，但跨文化素养表现较好。这些发现为我们理解家长教育卷入的作用及改善中学生学科素养提供了启示。

关键词: 家长教育卷入, 潜在类别分析, PISA, 学科素养

Abstract:

It is both theoretically and practically important to investigate the types and features of parental involvement and their relationships with secondary school students’ subject literacy. Using the data of Hong Kong and Macao in PISA 2018, this study conducted a latent class analysis (LCA) to identify four different latent classes of parental involvement. We then used the robust three step method (R3STEP）and BCH respectively to test how covariates such as region, student gender, and grade contributed to the classification of parental involvement and how different classes of parental involvement were related to students’ mathematics literacy, reading literacy, science literacy, and global competence. The results showed that (a) region, student gender, grade, family ESCS, and parents’ expectation of their child’s educational level were significantly related to, while the gender of parents/guardians who filled the questionnaire was not significantly related to the classification of parental involvement; (b) students of different parental involvement classes were in general found to be significantly different from each other in terms of their subject literacy. Specifically, students of Class 1 (Low Involvement Class, C1, 39.1%) were found to have the highest average scores in mathematics literacy, reading literacy, and science literacy, but not in global competence. Students of Class 2 (Busy and High Involvement Class, C2, 33.3%) were found to have slightly higher average scores in reading literacy than those of class 3 (Comprehensive and High Involvement Class, C3, 23.1%), but have lower performance in mathematics literacy, science literacy, and global competence than those of Class 3. Students of Class 4 (Limited and Moderate Involvement Class, C4, 4.5%) were found to have the lowest average scores in mathematics literacy, reading literacy, and science literacy, but have better performance in global competence.

Key words: parental involvement, latent class analysis, PISA, subject literacy