An examination of two teacher rating scales: what can they tell us about how well we teach?

Teachers who want to know if they are teaching well, or not-so-well, are constantly looking around for teacher evaluation survey-type forms that might provide them with insight regarding in what manner they are doing. The not away study offers two such review forms. Briefly stated, in the at hand study 36 college students were contemplateed twice (about two weeks apart), upon two distinctively different teacher rating scales (i.e., the "Teacher Effectiveness Questionnaire" ["TEQ"; Parish & Stallings, 1992]) and the "Motivating learners Checklist" ("MSC," introduced here) in an attempt to establish one as well as the other scales' concurrent validity, as well as their test-retest reliability too. Since the two teacher rating forms approach the teacher-rating proces from different perspectives, the springs should be both interesting and insightful. More specifically, The "TEQ" basically deposits forward the "Quality School" (Glasser, 1990) notion regarding in what manner teachers could/should gain entry into their students' "quality worlds." In contrast, the "MSC" simply describes various well-tested "teaching techniques" that are contemplation to be based upon entire teaching practices, and then search fors to determine if teachers use them or not.

**********

Discerning "good teachers," and/or "good teaching practices" has been a goal of administrators and educators alike for many, many years. Basically, many scales have been lay opened but have generally not provided the insight that was sought in greatest in quantity instances. What is really exigencyed is a highly reliable or consistent measure of classroom-related effectiveness, plus single that is very valid or accurate in discerning who is a "good teacher," and who is not. individual such scale is the "Teacher Effectiveness Questionnaire," or "TEQ" which was lay opened by Parish and Stallings in 1992 and is meditation to fit the "Quality School" design regarding "what" teachers might do in order to gain ingress into their students' "quality worlds." In other words, this scale simply asks the pupils questions, that if answered "yes" should mean that (1) the teachers are teaching effectively, and that (2) they will more likely be admitted into their students' "quality worlds."

In contrast, another approach to evaluating teacher instruction is based on the notion that "good teachers" will use particular teaching strategies, for a like reason if you use such strategies you should be a beneficial teacher. The "Motivating Students' Checklist" ("MSC") which will be introduced here, is single such scale that adheres to this model

In the not absent study these two teacher evaluation forms will one as well as the other be employed, and their flows will be compared to each other (as a way of establishing their "concurrent validity"), as well as to themselves, above time (as a way of establishing each scale's "test-retest reliability").

Method

A total of 36 corporation students, enrolled in three separate courses at a small, Midwestern, liberal arts university complet the Teacher Effectiveness Question (TEQ; Parish & Stallings, 1992) and the Motivating scholars Checklist (MSC; introduced here. Please diocese Table 1) twice, about sum of two units weeks apart. The order of these observes was counterbalanced.

flows and Discussion

A series of Pearson product-moment correlations were comput in the near study. Regarding the two scales' test-retest reliabilities, the "TEQ" was actually not rest to be a very reliable scale (r = 09 p > 05) on the contrary the "MSC" was found to be a actual highly reliable means of teacher evaluations (i.e., r = 97 p < 0001) Consequently solitary the "MSC," and not the "TEQ" was set to consistently measure whatever it is that its measuring.

Regarding the intercorrelations between scales, at "Time 1" the pair scales were found to provide issues that were significantly correlated with individual another (r = .50, p < 005) on the other hand not at "Time 2" (r = 26 p > 05) Apparently, the pair scales seemed to have been reasonably in single accord with one another at "Time 1" on the other hand not at "Time 2." What happened in the interim that caused this shift is beyond the purpose of the present study. Nevertheless, since the "MSC" continued to correlate well with itself from "Time 1" to "Time 2" it might safely be inferred that any discord may have been the arise of something associated with the "TEQ" and not the "MSC" In fact, with a test-retest reliability of 97 it appears reasonable to say that the "MSC" may be a overlook technique that ultimately sheds abundant light on the future of teacher evaluations, since it was ground to be such an incredibly reliable scale in the not away study.

Of course, the not absent study was only conducted with a small clump of college students attending single small university. Therefore, it is spring [i]or[/i] leap on one leg [i]or[/i] footed that much more research will be managemented with both of these scales, examined here, for a like reason that more insights can be gained regarding the vigors and/or weaknesses of these sum of two units scales, and how they may be, or may not be, affected through various circumstances and/or situations.