英语翻译As far as the aim of the study concerning the identification of additional variables at the student level is concerned,it was found that some types of personality (e.g.,conscientiousness and openness to experience) and some styles of thin

英语翻译As far as the aim of the study concerning the identification of additional variables at the student level is concerned,it was found that some types of personality (e.g.,conscientiousness and openness to experience) and some styles of thin
英语翻译
As far as the aim of the study concerning the identification of additional variables at the student level is concerned,it was found that some types of personality (e.g.,conscientiousness and openness to experience) and some styles of thinking (e.g.,executive and liberal) were related to either cognitive or affective achievement gains.However,there was no consistency in relation to the effect of most styles of thinking in achievement within the components of each outcome measure of school effectiveness.Nevertheless,the inclusion of these two variables in each multilevel analysis significantly improves the explained percentage of achievement variation at student level in each outcome measure.Thus,the unexplained variance at student level of the last model of each outcome measure of this study is smaller than the variances remaining unexplained in the studies investigating the validity of Creemers’ model.This finding is in line with the results of studies investigating the relationship among personality traits,thinking styles,and achievement mentioned in the first part of the paper.In addition,the present study reveals that,although there is substantial overlap between a thinking styles measure and a measure of the Big Five personality dimensions,researchers who aim to develop a theoretical framework of educational effectiveness should measure both personality traits and thinking styles.It can therefore be argued that both personality and thinking style should be included in Creemers’ model and should be considered as predictors of both cognitive and affective gains.Teachers may also make use of the relationships of personality and thinking style with educational effectiveness reported here.For example,teachers may encourage their students to be conscientious and open-minded about their learning tasks and develop more creativity-generating thinking styles in order to benefit most from the schools.However,further research is needed in order to identify some further variables at students’ level related to achievement gains in cognitive and affective outcomes of schooling since at the student level more than 13% of the variance in each outcome measure remained unexplained.Further research is also needed to examine relationships between levels and specifically indirect effects from higher level factors through lower level factors on Comprehensive Model of Educational Effectiveness 145 student achievement.Although the model does not describe explicitly if and how classroom and school-level factors interact,it seems rational to assume that indirect effects will occur mostly between factors related to the same key concepts of quality,time,and opportunity.Thus,multilevel path analytic methods (Heck & Thomas,2000) could be used to examine the cross-level relationships.
要求通顺

英语翻译As far as the aim of the study concerning the identification of additional variables at the student level is concerned,it was found that some types of personality (e.g.,conscientiousness and openness to experience) and some styles of thin
据这项研究的目的是识别更多的变量在学生层面而言,它发现,某些类型的个性化设置（例如,自觉性和经验开放性）和一些风格的想法（例如,执行和自由）相关的认知或情感的成就收益.然而,没有一致性关系的影响,大多数款式的思维成果在每个学校效能的测量结果的组成部分.然而,这两个变量中包含的每一个多层次的分析,显着地提高了学生的水平在每一个测量结果的解释的成就百分比变化.因此,在学生的水平,本研究的每个的测量结果的最后模型是原因不明的方差小于剩余的方差不明原因Creemers“模型的有效性在调查研究.这一调查结果与调查研究的结果之间的关系,人格特质,思维方式和成果的文件的第一部分中提到的.此外,目前的研究表明,虽然有很大的重叠之间的思维方式的措施,大五人格维度的测量,研究人员的目标是发展教育成效的理论框架,应同时测量人格特质和思维方式.因此,可以说的个性和思维方式,应在Creemers“的模式,应被视为预测的认知和情感的收益.教师也可使用个性和思维方式之间的关系,这里的教育成效.例如,教师可以鼓励学生认真的态度和开放的态度,他们的学习任务和发展产生更多的创意思维方式中受益最多的学校.然而,还需要进一步研究,以确定学生的水平实现收益的认知和情意的教育,因为在每个测量结果的差异超过13％的学生的水平仍然无法解释一些进一步的变量.还需要进一步的研究,从更高层面的因素,通过较低的水平因素对教育效能145学生成绩的综合评价模型的研究水平之间的关系,特别是间接影响.虽然该模型不明确的描述是否以及如何教室和学校层面因素的相互作用,似乎合理的假设,间接影响之间大多发生在相同质量的关键概念,时间,和机会有关的因素.因此,多层次的路径分析方法（赫克和Thomas,2000）可以用来研究的跨层次的关系.