Skip to main content
Large-scale Assessments in Education

An IERI – International Educational Research Institute Journal

Table 5 Results final CFA analyses RQ1 with adapted scale constructs

From: Instructional quality: catalyst or pitfall in educational systems’ aim for high achievement and equity? An answer based on multilevel SEM analyses of TIMSS 2015 data in Flanders (Belgium), Germany, and Norway

 

Flandersb

Germany

Norway

b (SE)

b (SE)

b (SE)

Model within

 Classroom management

  CM–CM1

.54*** (.02)

.58*** (.02)

.59*** (.02)

  CM–

.51*** (.03)

.71*** (.02)

.70*** (.02)

  CM–CM3

.46*** (.03)

.68*** (.03)

.63*** (.02)

  CM–CM4

.43*** (.03)

.52*** (.02)

.39*** (.03)

  CM–CM5

.47*** (.02)

.57*** (.02)

.52*** (.03)

 Supportive climatea

  SC–SC1

.69*** (.02)

.60*** (.03)

.57*** (.02)

  SC–SC2

.68*** (.02)

.65*** (.02)

.53*** (.03)

  SC–SC3

.57*** (.03)

.63*** (.02)

.66*** (.02)

  SC–SC4

.69*** (.02)

.74*** (.02)

.64*** (.02)

  SC–SC5

.40*** (.02)

.41*** (.03)

.60*** (.02)

  SC–SC6

  

.65*** (.02)

  SC–SC7

  

.58*** (.02)

  SC–SC8

  

.66*** (.02)

  SC–SC9

  

.59*** (.02)

  SC–SC10

  

.53*** (.02)

 Cognitive activation component 2

  CA–CA2

.60*** (.03)

  

  CA–CA5

.52*** (.02)

  

  CA–CA7

.45*** (.03)

  

 Correlations

  CM–SC

.18***

.16***

.11***

  CM–CA(2)

− .04

  

  SC–CA(2)

.63***

  

Model between

 Classroom management

  CM–CM1

1.00*** (.03)

.96*** (.03)

1.00*** (.03)

  CM–CM2

.83*** (.04)

.99*** (.03)

.91*** (.04)

  CM–CM3

.85*** (.05)

.94*** (.03)

.87*** (.06)

  CM–CM4

.79*** (.05)

.91*** (.04)

.96*** (.05)

  CM–CM5

.83*** (.04)

.91*** (.03)

.92*** (.05)

 Supportive climatea

  SC–SC1

.85*** (.05)

.88*** (.06)

.97*** (.06)

  SC–SC2

.94*** (.04)

.92*** (.06)

.94*** (.09)

  SC–SC3

.95*** (.05)

.85*** (.07)

.88*** (.07)

  SC–SC4

.83*** (.05)

.96*** (.04)

.87*** (.06)

  SC–SC5

.75*** (.07)

.90*** (.08)

.98*** (.07)

  SC–SC6

  

.98*** (.06)

  SC–SC7

  

.96*** (.15)

  SC–SC8

  

.90*** (.08)

  SC–SC9

  

.80*** (.19)

  SC–SC10

  

.52*** (.14)

 Cognitive activation component 2

  CA–CA2

.87*** (.07)

  

  CA–CA5

.87*** (.10)

  

  CA–CA7

.65*** (.11)

  

 Correlations

   

  CM–SC

.36***

.12

.54***

  CM–CA(2)

.04

  

  SC–CA(2)

.69***

  

Model fit

RMSEA

.02

.03

.03

CFI

.96

.97

.95

SRMR within

.03

.02

.03

SRMR between

.07

.06

.08

Chi2 (df)

501.99*** (120)

249.47*** (64)

706.42*** (170)

ICC

ICC[1]

ICC[2]

ICC[1]

ICC[2]

ICC[1]

ICC[2]

CM

.36

.91

.23

.81

.22

.84

SC

.16

.77

.10

.62

.14

.75

CA(2)

.18

.79

    

ω

Within

Between

Within

Between

Within

Between

CM

.64

.99

.78

.99

.73

.78

SC

.76

.99

.76

.99

.85

.92

CA(2)

.55

.99

    
  1. *** p < .001
  2. aAs stated in the paragraph 'Measures' under the heading of 'Research design', in Norway supportive climate was measured by different items. The items and accompanying numbering of items in the analyses of Norway stem from the item numbering in Appendix
  3. bFor reasons of uniformity of the models across countries, we also estimated a model in Flanders not including the construct of CA(2). This model shows similar fit indices and does not significantly differ from the model reported with regard to factor loadings of CM and SC
Back to article page