运用课堂观察评价特殊教育教师

IF 2.4 1区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Nathan D. Jones, Courtney A. Bell, Mary T. Brownell, Yi Qi, David J. Peyton, Daisy J. Pua, Melissa Fowler, Steven Holtzman
{"title":"运用课堂观察评价特殊教育教师","authors":"Nathan D. Jones, Courtney A. Bell, Mary T. Brownell, Yi Qi, David J. Peyton, Daisy J. Pua, Melissa Fowler, Steven Holtzman","doi":"10.3102/01623737211068523","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We examine whether one of the most popular observation systems in teacher evaluation—the Framework for Teaching (FFT)—captures the range of instructional skills teachers need to be effective. We focus on the case of special educators, who are likely to use instructional approaches that, although supported by research, are de-emphasized in common observation systems. Drawing on 206 lessons from 51 teachers, we compare FFT scores to an observation system from special education. We find that FFT’s psychometric properties are consistent with previous studies, but the system is limited in assessing the quality of instructional practices used in special education. We discuss implications of these findings for two practical uses of observations—supporting teacher development and informing human capital decisions.","PeriodicalId":48079,"journal":{"name":"Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis","volume":"44 1","pages":"429 - 457"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Using Classroom Observations in the Evaluation of Special Education Teachers\",\"authors\":\"Nathan D. Jones, Courtney A. Bell, Mary T. Brownell, Yi Qi, David J. Peyton, Daisy J. Pua, Melissa Fowler, Steven Holtzman\",\"doi\":\"10.3102/01623737211068523\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"We examine whether one of the most popular observation systems in teacher evaluation—the Framework for Teaching (FFT)—captures the range of instructional skills teachers need to be effective. We focus on the case of special educators, who are likely to use instructional approaches that, although supported by research, are de-emphasized in common observation systems. Drawing on 206 lessons from 51 teachers, we compare FFT scores to an observation system from special education. We find that FFT’s psychometric properties are consistent with previous studies, but the system is limited in assessing the quality of instructional practices used in special education. We discuss implications of these findings for two practical uses of observations—supporting teacher development and informing human capital decisions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48079,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis\",\"volume\":\"44 1\",\"pages\":\"429 - 457\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737211068523\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737211068523","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

我们研究了教师评估中最流行的观察系统之一——教学框架(FFT)——是否捕捉到了教师需要有效教学技能的范围。我们将重点放在特殊教育工作者的案例上,他们可能使用的教学方法虽然得到了研究的支持,但在普通观察系统中却不被重视。利用51位教师的206节课,我们将FFT分数与特殊教育的观察系统进行了比较。我们发现FFT的心理测量特性与先前的研究一致,但该系统在评估特殊教育教学实践的质量方面受到限制。我们讨论了这些发现对观察的两种实际用途的影响——支持教师发展和为人力资本决策提供信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Using Classroom Observations in the Evaluation of Special Education Teachers
We examine whether one of the most popular observation systems in teacher evaluation—the Framework for Teaching (FFT)—captures the range of instructional skills teachers need to be effective. We focus on the case of special educators, who are likely to use instructional approaches that, although supported by research, are de-emphasized in common observation systems. Drawing on 206 lessons from 51 teachers, we compare FFT scores to an observation system from special education. We find that FFT’s psychometric properties are consistent with previous studies, but the system is limited in assessing the quality of instructional practices used in special education. We discuss implications of these findings for two practical uses of observations—supporting teacher development and informing human capital decisions.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis
Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
5.90%
发文量
36
期刊介绍: Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis (EEPA) publishes manuscripts of theoretical or practical interest to those engaged in educational evaluation or policy analysis, including economic, demographic, financial, and political analyses of education policies, and significant meta-analyses or syntheses that address issues of current concern. The journal seeks high-quality research on how reforms and interventions affect educational outcomes; research on how multiple educational policy and reform initiatives support or conflict with each other; and research that informs pending changes in educational policy at the federal, state, and local levels, demonstrating an effect on early childhood through early adulthood.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信