利用Rasch模型和焦点小组为教师评估员的培训提供信息

R. Lambert, C. Moore, Bryndle L. Bottoms, A. Vestal, H. Taylor
{"title":"利用Rasch模型和焦点小组为教师评估员的培训提供信息","authors":"R. Lambert, C. Moore, Bryndle L. Bottoms, A. Vestal, H. Taylor","doi":"10.29034/ijmra.v13n2a4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There are few empirical studies of teacher performance evaluation systems. Teachers are rightfully concerned about the degree to which evaluators’ idiosyncratic biases might undermine the process. Training evaluators thoroughly and monitoring the reliability, validity, fairness, and cultural sensitivity of their ratings are essential steps towards promoting strong performance evaluation systems. This study examined the process of evaluating early childhood teachers to inform evaluator training. The researchers sought to determine the degree to which the expectations of those who develop training materials and conduct evaluator trainings differ from the typical performance ratings given by evaluators in the field. Researchers used several methods to prompt a systematic examination of the evaluator training process across four sequential phases of investigation: (a) quantitative panel ratings of item difficulty, (b) panel discussion and consensus building (a qualitative phase), (c) examining expected versus empirical item difficulty (a quantitative phase), and (d) presenting the empirical difficulty levels to the panel for discussion (a qualitative phase). In this last phase, researchers presented results of Rasch modeling to the panel, along with levels of agreement between the empirical and expected difficulty levels. Panel members reported that the process of discussing their perceptions of expected item difficulty levels was valuable. They also reported that such discussion prompted them to reevaluate the training materials, the resource manuals, and other professional development resources. The study methods presented can be used to investigate and to improve other personnel evaluation systems.","PeriodicalId":89571,"journal":{"name":"International journal of multiple research approaches","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Use of Rasch Modeling and Focus Groups to Inform the Training of Teacher Evaluators\",\"authors\":\"R. Lambert, C. Moore, Bryndle L. Bottoms, A. Vestal, H. Taylor\",\"doi\":\"10.29034/ijmra.v13n2a4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"There are few empirical studies of teacher performance evaluation systems. Teachers are rightfully concerned about the degree to which evaluators’ idiosyncratic biases might undermine the process. Training evaluators thoroughly and monitoring the reliability, validity, fairness, and cultural sensitivity of their ratings are essential steps towards promoting strong performance evaluation systems. This study examined the process of evaluating early childhood teachers to inform evaluator training. The researchers sought to determine the degree to which the expectations of those who develop training materials and conduct evaluator trainings differ from the typical performance ratings given by evaluators in the field. Researchers used several methods to prompt a systematic examination of the evaluator training process across four sequential phases of investigation: (a) quantitative panel ratings of item difficulty, (b) panel discussion and consensus building (a qualitative phase), (c) examining expected versus empirical item difficulty (a quantitative phase), and (d) presenting the empirical difficulty levels to the panel for discussion (a qualitative phase). In this last phase, researchers presented results of Rasch modeling to the panel, along with levels of agreement between the empirical and expected difficulty levels. Panel members reported that the process of discussing their perceptions of expected item difficulty levels was valuable. They also reported that such discussion prompted them to reevaluate the training materials, the resource manuals, and other professional development resources. The study methods presented can be used to investigate and to improve other personnel evaluation systems.\",\"PeriodicalId\":89571,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International journal of multiple research approaches\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-04-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International journal of multiple research approaches\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.29034/ijmra.v13n2a4\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of multiple research approaches","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.29034/ijmra.v13n2a4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

关于教师绩效评价体系的实证研究很少。教师们有理由担心评估者的特殊偏见会在多大程度上破坏这一过程。彻底培训评价人员并监测其评价的可靠性、有效性、公平性和文化敏感性,是促进强有力的业绩评价制度的必要步骤。本研究检视幼儿教师评鉴的过程,为评鉴员训练提供资讯。研究人员试图确定那些编写培训材料和进行评估人员培训的人的期望与实地评估人员给出的典型绩效评分之间的差异程度。研究人员使用了几种方法,在四个连续的调查阶段对评估者培训过程进行了系统的检查:(a)定量小组对项目难度进行评级,(b)小组讨论和建立共识(定性阶段),(c)检查预期和经验项目难度(定量阶段),以及(d)向小组提出经验难度水平进行讨论(定性阶段)。在最后一个阶段,研究人员向小组展示了Rasch模型的结果,以及经验和预期难度水平之间的一致程度。小组成员报告说,讨论他们对预期项目难度水平的看法的过程是有价值的。他们还报告说,这种讨论促使他们重新评价培训材料、资源手册和其他专业发展资源。所提出的研究方法可用于其他人员评价体系的研究和改进。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Use of Rasch Modeling and Focus Groups to Inform the Training of Teacher Evaluators
There are few empirical studies of teacher performance evaluation systems. Teachers are rightfully concerned about the degree to which evaluators’ idiosyncratic biases might undermine the process. Training evaluators thoroughly and monitoring the reliability, validity, fairness, and cultural sensitivity of their ratings are essential steps towards promoting strong performance evaluation systems. This study examined the process of evaluating early childhood teachers to inform evaluator training. The researchers sought to determine the degree to which the expectations of those who develop training materials and conduct evaluator trainings differ from the typical performance ratings given by evaluators in the field. Researchers used several methods to prompt a systematic examination of the evaluator training process across four sequential phases of investigation: (a) quantitative panel ratings of item difficulty, (b) panel discussion and consensus building (a qualitative phase), (c) examining expected versus empirical item difficulty (a quantitative phase), and (d) presenting the empirical difficulty levels to the panel for discussion (a qualitative phase). In this last phase, researchers presented results of Rasch modeling to the panel, along with levels of agreement between the empirical and expected difficulty levels. Panel members reported that the process of discussing their perceptions of expected item difficulty levels was valuable. They also reported that such discussion prompted them to reevaluate the training materials, the resource manuals, and other professional development resources. The study methods presented can be used to investigate and to improve other personnel evaluation systems.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信