Abstract
The authors examined whether we can use the same instrument for measuring and comparing the mathematical identities of lower secondary school students and those of university students in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). Specifically, Rasch measurement techniques were used on items from an instrument that was earlier validated for measuring mathematical identities in STEM contexts to assess the psychometric properties of the instrument in lower secondary school. Moreover, data from the two contexts were merged to assess the invariance of the instrument. The results indicate that the same instrument can measure mathematical identity in STEM contexts and lower secondary school contexts. Also, evidence is provided that the instrument is practically invariant. Implications and suggestions for further research are provided.
Highlights
In mathematics education, one of the dominant constructs during the last two decades has been “identity.” Mathematics related identities have been used to examine aspects of power, access, equity, career choice, interactions between individuals in mathematical activities, socio-political issues, and persons’ relationships with mathematics (Darragh, 2016, p. 19–20)
This claim might hold for some definitions of identity, we maintain that the argument is not true in general, and we base our reasoning on the observation that measurement is a frequently applied method for studying identities in social and educational psychology (Abdelal et al, 2009)
With the definitions we proposed in the previous section, this study had two objectives: (1) to assess whether the psychometric properties of the characteristics listed in Fig. 1 are sufficiently good for measuring lower secondary students’ (LS) students’ personal mathematical identities, and (2) to assess whether the structures of the characteristics in the two contexts are similar enough for comparisons of personal mathematical identities to make sense
Summary
One of the dominant constructs during the last two decades has been “identity.” Mathematics related identities have been used to examine aspects of power, access, equity, career choice, interactions between individuals in mathematical activities, socio-political issues, and persons’ relationships with mathematics (Darragh, 2016, p. 19–20). One reason why qualitative data dominate studies on identity in mathematics education might be theoretical; it could be the case that principles of identity and principles of measurement, for instance, those that were proposed by Thurstone (e.g., 1959), are incompatible. This claim might hold for some definitions of identity, we maintain that the argument is not true in general, and we base our reasoning on the observation that measurement is a frequently applied method for studying identities in social and educational psychology (Abdelal et al, 2009). Instruments exist for measuring racial and ethnical identities (e.g., Cross & Vandiver, 2001; Phinney & Chavira, 1992), ego identities (Tan, Kendis, Porac, & Fine, 1977), vocational identities (Holland, Johnston, & Asama, 1993), creative role identities (Huang, Lee, & Yang, 2019), and gender identities (e.g., Henley, Meng, O’Brien, McCarthy, & Sockloskie, 1998), to mention but a few
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
