Assessing Quality of Teaching from Different Perspectives: Measurement Invariance across Teachers and Classes

IF 2.1 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH

Educational Assessment Pub Date : 2021-04-03 DOI:10.1080/10627197.2020.1858785

G. Krammer, Barbara Pflanzl, Gerlinde Lenske, Johannes Mayr

{"title":"Assessing Quality of Teaching from Different Perspectives: Measurement Invariance across Teachers and Classes","authors":"G. Krammer, Barbara Pflanzl, Gerlinde Lenske, Johannes Mayr","doi":"10.1080/10627197.2020.1858785","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Comparing teachers’ self-assessment to classes’ assessment of quality of teaching can offer insights for educational research and be a valuable resource for teachers’ continuous professional development. However, the quality of teaching needs to be measured in the same way across perspectives for this comparison to be meaningful. We used data from 622 teachers self-assessing aspects of quality of teaching and of their classes (12229 students) assessing the same aspects. Perspectives were compared with measurement invariance analyses. Teachers and classes agreed on the average level of instructional clarity, and disagreed over teacher-student relationship and performance monitoring, suggesting that mean differences across perspectives may not be as consistent as the literature claims. Results showed a nonuniform measurement bias for only one item of instructional clarity, while measurement of the other aspects was directly comparable. We conclude the viability of comparing teachers’ and classes’ perspectives of aspects of quality of teaching.","PeriodicalId":46209,"journal":{"name":"Educational Assessment","volume":"26 1","pages":"88 - 103"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10627197.2020.1858785","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Assessment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10627197.2020.1858785","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 4

Abstract

ABSTRACT Comparing teachers’ self-assessment to classes’ assessment of quality of teaching can offer insights for educational research and be a valuable resource for teachers’ continuous professional development. However, the quality of teaching needs to be measured in the same way across perspectives for this comparison to be meaningful. We used data from 622 teachers self-assessing aspects of quality of teaching and of their classes (12229 students) assessing the same aspects. Perspectives were compared with measurement invariance analyses. Teachers and classes agreed on the average level of instructional clarity, and disagreed over teacher-student relationship and performance monitoring, suggesting that mean differences across perspectives may not be as consistent as the literature claims. Results showed a nonuniform measurement bias for only one item of instructional clarity, while measurement of the other aspects was directly comparable. We conclude the viability of comparing teachers’ and classes’ perspectives of aspects of quality of teaching.

查看原文本刊更多论文

从不同角度评估教学质量:教师和班级之间的测量不变性

将教师自我评价与课堂教学质量评价进行比较，可以为教育研究提供见解，是教师持续专业发展的宝贵资源。然而，为了使这种比较有意义，教学质量需要以同样的方式跨视角进行衡量。我们使用的数据来自622名教师对教学质量的自我评估，以及他们的班级(12229名学生)对相同方面的评估。比较透视与测量不变性分析。教师和班级在教学清晰度的平均水平上达成一致，但在师生关系和绩效监控方面存在分歧，这表明不同观点的平均差异可能不像文献所声称的那样一致。结果显示，只有一个项目的教学清晰度不均匀的测量偏差，而测量的其他方面是直接可比。我们总结了比较教师和学生在教学质量方面的观点的可行性。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Educational Assessment EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-

CiteScore

3.20

自引率

6.70%

发文量

期刊介绍： Educational Assessment publishes original research and scholarship on the assessment of individuals, groups, and programs in educational settings. It includes theory, methodological approaches and empirical research in the appraisal of the learning and achievement of students and teachers, young children and adults, and novices and experts. The journal reports on current large-scale testing practices, discusses alternative approaches, presents scholarship on classroom assessment practices and includes assessment topics debated at the national level. It welcomes both conceptual and empirical pieces and encourages articles that provide a strong bridge between theory and/or empirical research and the implications for educational policy and/or practice.