Rudd Georgia, Meissel Kane, Meyer Frauke
Faculty of Education and Social Work, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92601, Symonds Street, Auckland, 1150 New Zealand.
Educ Assess Eval Account. 2023;35(2):169-200. doi: 10.1007/s11092-022-09384-0. Epub 2022 May 25.
Academic resilience captures academic success despite adversity and thus is an important concept for promoting equity within education. However, our understanding of how and why rates of academic resilience differ between contexts is currently limited by variation in the ways that the construct has been operationalised in quantitative research. Similarly, comparing the strength of protective factors that promote academic resilience is hindered by differing approaches to the measurement of academic resilience. This methodological variation has complicated attempts to reconcile disparate findings about academic resilience. The current study applied six commonly used operationalisations of academic resilience that combined different thresholds of high risk and high achievement, to three international large-scale assessments, to explore how these different operationalisations impacted the findings produced. The context of Aotearoa New Zealand was chosen as a case study to further academic resilience research within this context and investigate how academic resilience manifests in an education system with relatively high levels of average achievement alongside low levels of educational equity. Within international large-scale assessment datasets, prevalence rates differed markedly across subject areas, grade levels, and collection cycles, as a function of the measure of academic resilience employed, while the strength of protective factors was more consistent. Thresholds that were norm-referenced produced more consistent findings across the different datasets compared to thresholds that were criterion-referenced. High levels of missing data prevented the analysis of some datasets, and differences in the way that key constructs were measured undermined the comparability of findings across international large-scale assessments. The findings emphasise the strengths and limitations of utilising international large-scale assessment data for the study of academic resilience, particularly within the Aotearoa New Zealand context. Furthermore, the study highlights that researchers' methodological decisions have important impacts on the conclusions drawn about academic resilience.
The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11092-022-09384-0.
学业复原力描述的是尽管面临逆境仍能取得学业成功的情况，因此是促进教育公平的一个重要概念。然而，目前我们对于学业复原力在不同背景下的差异方式及原因的理解，受到定量研究中该概念操作化方式差异的限制。同样，由于学业复原力测量方法的不同，比较促进学业复原力的保护因素的强度也受到阻碍。这种方法上的差异使得调和关于学业复原力的不同研究结果变得复杂。本研究将学业复原力的六种常用操作化方法（这些方法结合了不同的高风险和高成就阈值）应用于三项国际大规模评估中，以探讨这些不同的操作化方法如何影响所产生的研究结果。选择新西兰作为案例研究背景进一步开展学业复原力研究，并调查在一个平均成绩水平相对较高但教育公平程度较低的教育系统中学业复原力是如何体现的。在国际大规模评估数据集中，患病率在不同学科领域、年级水平和收集周期中存在显著差异，这是所采用的学业复原力测量方法的函数，而保护因素的强度则更为一致。与标准参照阈值相比，常模参照阈值在不同数据集中产生的结果更一致。大量的缺失数据妨碍了对一些数据集的分析，并且关键结构测量方式的差异削弱了国际大规模评估结果的可比性。研究结果强调了利用国际大规模评估数据研究学业复原力的优势和局限性，特别是在新西兰的背景下。此外，该研究强调研究人员的方法学决策对关于学业复原力得出的结论有重要影响。
在线版本包含可在10.1007/s11092-022-09384-0获取的补充材料。
