Volume 5, Issue 2 (Summer 2022)
Iranian Journal of Educational Sociology 2022, 5(2): 195-209 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Abbasi Taghidizaj R, Malmir M. (2022). An Exploratory Study Explaining the Causes of Success in Science Olympiads: A Multilevel Analysis with Different Units. Iranian Journal of Educational Sociology. 5(2), 195-209. doi:10.61186/ijes.5.2.195
URL: http://iase-idje.ir/article-1-1132-en.html
URL: http://iase-idje.ir/article-1-1132-en.html
1- Assistant Professor, Department of History and Sociology, University of Mohaghegh Ardabili, Ardabil, Iran (Corresponding Author).
2- Assistant Professor, Department of Social Sciences, Faculty of Letters and Human Sciences, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran.
2- Assistant Professor, Department of Social Sciences, Faculty of Letters and Human Sciences, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran.
Abstract: (1128 Views)
Purpose: In this study, a minimal theoretical framework was set based on the coexistence of different analytical levels to discover the causes for the success of students and schools in science Olympiads with two separate analysis units.
Methodology: This research has been conducted at two micro and intermediate levels through multiple case study and in-depth interview. At the intermediate level, the analysis unit was school and the statistical population included all schools. The intermediate level research sample included two sets: positive cases (5 successful schools from Yazd province) and negative cases (5 unsuccessful schools from Ardabil province), which were selected purposefully. The strategy used at this level was multiple case studies, and the results were analyzed with the comparative qualitative technique. For the validity and reliability of the measuring instrument at this level, real and theoretical repetition was used. At the micro level, the unit of analysis was Olympiad students and 10 interviews were conducted by considering the condition of theoretical saturation. The research tool included in-depth interviews with students, which were analyzed using the grounded theory and the open-centered-selective coding technique. For the validity and reliability of the measuring instrument, the inter-coder agreement and the review of the results by the members were used, and in the comparative study, real and theoretical repetition was used.
Findings: This study showed that students’ success in scientific Olympiads is a function of the constructive interaction of the two main institutions (school Olympiad atmosphere and attracting family support) and regional success experience. Other factors such as student cognitive interest, the attractiveness of Olympiad competition, and external incentives are also important. The results of comparative analysis of schools are parallel to the results of the above research and complement it, as the results showed that among the successful schools, almost all the main criteria, including the seminar to introduce parents to attract their support, educational counseling, and classes by former medalists, among other factors, determine the success of schools.
Conclusion: According to the findings, it should be said that the success of students and schools in the science Olympiad is affected by several factors at the micro, intermediate, and macro levels, including the quality of the actors to the synergistic atmosphere of school and family.
Methodology: This research has been conducted at two micro and intermediate levels through multiple case study and in-depth interview. At the intermediate level, the analysis unit was school and the statistical population included all schools. The intermediate level research sample included two sets: positive cases (5 successful schools from Yazd province) and negative cases (5 unsuccessful schools from Ardabil province), which were selected purposefully. The strategy used at this level was multiple case studies, and the results were analyzed with the comparative qualitative technique. For the validity and reliability of the measuring instrument at this level, real and theoretical repetition was used. At the micro level, the unit of analysis was Olympiad students and 10 interviews were conducted by considering the condition of theoretical saturation. The research tool included in-depth interviews with students, which were analyzed using the grounded theory and the open-centered-selective coding technique. For the validity and reliability of the measuring instrument, the inter-coder agreement and the review of the results by the members were used, and in the comparative study, real and theoretical repetition was used.
Findings: This study showed that students’ success in scientific Olympiads is a function of the constructive interaction of the two main institutions (school Olympiad atmosphere and attracting family support) and regional success experience. Other factors such as student cognitive interest, the attractiveness of Olympiad competition, and external incentives are also important. The results of comparative analysis of schools are parallel to the results of the above research and complement it, as the results showed that among the successful schools, almost all the main criteria, including the seminar to introduce parents to attract their support, educational counseling, and classes by former medalists, among other factors, determine the success of schools.
Conclusion: According to the findings, it should be said that the success of students and schools in the science Olympiad is affected by several factors at the micro, intermediate, and macro levels, including the quality of the actors to the synergistic atmosphere of school and family.
Keywords: Scientific Olympiad, Grounded Theory, Case Study, Quality of Action Agents, School and Family
Type of Study: Research Article |
Subject:
Special
Received: 2021/12/11 | Accepted: 2022/05/8 | Published: 2022/09/22
Received: 2021/12/11 | Accepted: 2022/05/8 | Published: 2022/09/22
References
1. Alon, S. (2009). The Evolution of Class Inequality in Higher Education: Competition, Exclusion, and Adaptation. American Sociological Review, (74:731-755). [DOI:10.1177/000312240907400503]
2. Battin-Pearson, S., Newcomb, M. D., Hill, K. G., Catalano, R. F., & Hawkins, J. D. (2000). Predictors of early high school dropout: A test of five theories. Journal of Educational Psychology, (92(3): 568-582). [DOI:10.1037/0022-0663.92.3.568]
3. Berkowitz, R., Moore, H., Astor, R. A., & Benbenishty, R. (2018). A research synthesis of the associations between socioeconomic background, inequality, school climate, and academic achievement. Review of Educational Research, (87(2): 425-469). [DOI:10.3102/0034654316669821]
4. Binti, H., Bakri, B., Mustapha, N., & Midi, H. (2010). Statistical Fact of Students, Background and Academic Achievement in Higher Educational Institution. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, (8: 79-84). [DOI:10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.011]
5. Burke, T. J., Segrin, C., & Farris, K. L. (2018). Young adult and parent perceptions of facilitation: Associations with overparenting, family functioning, and student adjustment. (18(3): 233-247). [DOI:10.1080/15267431.2018.1467913]
6. Grodsky, E. (2007). Compensatory Scholarship in Higher Education. American Journal of Sociology, (112(6): 1662-1712). [DOI:10.1086/512707]
7. Hearn, J. C. (1991). Academic and Nonacademic Influences on the College Destinations of 1980 High School Graduates. Sociology of Education, (64(3): 158-171). [DOI:10.2307/2112849]
8. Hidi, S. (2006). Interest : A Unique Motivational Variable. Educational Research Review, (1: 69-82). [DOI:10.1016/j.edurev.2006.09.001]
9. Jimerson, S. R. (2001). Meta-analysis of grade retention research: Implications for practice in the 21st century. School Psychology Review, (30(3): 420-437). [DOI:10.1080/02796015.2001.12086124]
10. Jones, T. M., Fleming, C., & Anne, W. (2020). Racial equity in academic success: The role of school climate and social emotional learning. Children and Youth Services Review, (119: 105-123). [DOI:10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105623] [PMID] [PMCID]
11. Kwong, D., & Davis, J. R. (2015). School Climate for Academic Success: A Multilevel Analysis of School Climate and Student Outcomes. Journal of Research in Education, (25(2): 68-81).
12. Neuman, L. (1991). Social Research Methods. Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon. [DOI:10.1557/PROC-243-381]
13. Ragin, C. (1987). The Comparative Method. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
14. Samari Safa, J., Dashti, M., & Pourdel, M. (2021). Development of a Model of Academic Buoyancy based on with School Connection, Family's Emotional Atmosphere, Motivation, Self-efficacy and Academic Engagement of Students. QJCR, (20(77): 225-256). [DOI:10.18502/qjcr.v20i77.6149]
15. Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. M. (2013). Basics of qualitative research: grounded theory procedures and techniques (Third Edition ed.). (E. Afshar, Trans.) Tehran: Ney Publishing.
16. Walker, S. P., Grantham-McGregor, S. M., Himes, J. H., Williams, S., & Duff, E. M. (1998). School performance in adolescent Jamaican girls: associations with health, social and behavioral characteristics, and risk factors for dropout. (21(1): 109-122). [DOI:10.1006/jado.1997.0133] [PMID]
17. Wang, M.-T., & Degol, J. (2016). School climate: A review of the construct, measurement, and impact on student outcomes. Educational Psychology Review, (28(2): 315-352).
https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-15-0214.1
https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-15-0642.1
https://doi.org/10.3390/cli4030043
https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-15-0259.1
https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-15-0313.1
https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0106.1
https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-15-0485.1
https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-15-0766.1
https://doi.org/10.1080/13697137.2016.1231175
https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-15-0653.1 [DOI:10.1175/JCLI-D-15-0712.1]
18. Won, S., Wolters, C. A., & Mueller, S. A. (2018). Sense of belonging and self-regulated learning: Testing achievement goals as mediators. The Journal of Experimental Education, (86(3): 402-418). [DOI:10.1080/00220973.2016.1277337]
19. Yin, R. K. (2003). Case Study Research: Design and Methods. London: Sage Publication.
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
.jpg)
