Abstract
Holtsch, D, Brückner, S, Förster, M, et al. (2019) Gender gap in Swiss vocational education and training teachers’ economics content knowledge and the role of teaching experience. Citizenship, Social and Economics Education 18(3): 218–237. DOI: 10.1177/2047173419893595
In the above article, the following sentences have been published incorrectly. Below are the correct sentences:
In Methodology section, under Sample subheading, paragraph 2, sentence number 5: Age correlated strongly with teaching experience (for the LINCA study: Bravais–Pearson r = 0.833, p < 0.000, for the sample of 153 teachers: Bravais–Pearson r = 0.815, p < 0.000) and was therefore excluded from the following analyses.
In Results section, under Swiss E&S teachers’ economics content knowledge test performance, gender and teaching characteristics subheading, paragraph 2, sentence number 1: In Model 1, the only predictor of microeconomics knowledge is gender, which by itself explained 2.6% of the variance.
In Results section, under Swiss E&S teachers’ economics content knowledge test performance, gender and teaching characteristics subheading, paragraph 2, sentence number 4: Teaching experience (quantified in years) explained 2.2% of the variance in the teachers’ microeconomics knowledge.
In Results section, under Swiss E&S teachers’ economics content knowledge test performance, gender and teaching characteristics subheading, paragraph 2, sentence number 8: Both gender and teaching experience explained 4.8% of the variance in the teachers’ microeconomics knowledge.
In Results section, under Swiss E&S teachers’ economics content knowledge test performance, gender and teaching characteristics subheading, paragraph 3, sentence number 2: In Model l, the only predictor is gender, which explains 4.1% of the variance in the teachers’ macroeconomics knowledge.
In Tables 4 to 6, the following values the following sentences have been published incorrectly. Below are the correct values:
In Table 4, Macroeconomics content categories section, row Money & Financial Markets, column Mm (SD), the correct value should be: 85.2** (23.7).
In Table 5, row Average teaching load, column Model 3 – B, the correct value should be: 0.021.
In Table 5, row R2, column Model 1 – B, the correct value should be: 0.026.
In Table 5, row R2, column Model 2 – B, the correct value should be: 0.022.
In Table 5, row R2, column Model 3 – B, the correct value should be: 0.048.
In Table 6, row R2, column Model 1 – B, the correct value should be: 0.041.
In Table 6, row R2, column Model 2 – B, the correct value should be: 0.009.
In Table 6, row R2, column Model 3 – B, the correct value should be: 0.054.
This rectification does not, however, change the interpretation of the results, and it has no consequences regarding the discussion in the final section of the paper.