English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This study examined sources of inconsistency between teachers’ and researchers’ interpretations of survey items. We analyzed cognitive interview data from 12 middle school mathematics teachers to understand their interpretations of survey items focused on one aspect of their practice: the content of their advice-seeking interactions. Through this analysis we found that previously documented conceptualizations of sources of misinterpretation within teacher surveys (e.g., structural complexity, use of reform language) did not adequately account for all of the inconsistencies between the survey items and teachers’ interpretations. We found it useful to reconceptualize the broader source of many of the misinterpretations as an issue of fit between the researchers’ intended interpretation and teachers’ professional practice

Why Don’t Teachers Understand Our Questions? Reconceptualizing Teachers’ “Misinterpretation” of Survey Items