Shelby J. Haberman, Sabine Meinck, Ann-Kristin Koop
{"title":"Teacher-centered analysis with TIMSS and PIRLS data: weighting approaches, accuracy, and precision","authors":"Shelby J. Haberman, Sabine Meinck, Ann-Kristin Koop","doi":"10.1186/s40536-024-00214-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This paper extends existing work on teacher weighting in student-centered surveys by looking into aspects of practical implementation of deriving and using weights for teacher-centered analysis in the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) and the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS). The formal conditions to compute teacher-centered weights are detailed, including mathematical equations. We provide a proposal on how to define the targeted populations as well as how to collect data that is needed to derive teacher-centered weights, yet currently unavailable. We also tackle the issue of teacher nonresponse by proposing a respective adjustment factor, as well as mentioning the challenge of multiple selection probabilities when teachers teach in multiple schools. The core part of the paper focuses on studying the level of accuracy that can be expected when estimating teacher population characteristics. We use TIMSS 2019 data and simulate likely scenarios regarding the variance in weights. The results show that (i) the different weighting scenarios lead to relatively similar estimates; however, the differences between the scenarios are sufficient to justify the recommendation to use correctly derived teacher weights; (ii) differences between estimated standard errors based on complex sampling and corresponding estimates based on simple random sampling are sufficiently consistent to support use of a procedure to estimate standard errors that accounts for both sample weights and the complex sampling design; (iii) sample sizes and variance in weights significantly limit estimate precision, so that total population estimates with sufficient precision are available in the majority of countries but subpopulation features are generally not sufficiently precise. To provide a critical evaluation of our results, we recommend implementation of the proposed method in one or more countries. This recommended study will permit examination of logistical considerations in implementation of required changes in data acquisition and will provide data to replicate the analysis with teacher-centered weights.</p>","PeriodicalId":37009,"journal":{"name":"Large-Scale Assessments in Education","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Large-Scale Assessments in Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40536-024-00214-x","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: 0
Abstract
This paper extends existing work on teacher weighting in student-centered surveys by looking into aspects of practical implementation of deriving and using weights for teacher-centered analysis in the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) and the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS). The formal conditions to compute teacher-centered weights are detailed, including mathematical equations. We provide a proposal on how to define the targeted populations as well as how to collect data that is needed to derive teacher-centered weights, yet currently unavailable. We also tackle the issue of teacher nonresponse by proposing a respective adjustment factor, as well as mentioning the challenge of multiple selection probabilities when teachers teach in multiple schools. The core part of the paper focuses on studying the level of accuracy that can be expected when estimating teacher population characteristics. We use TIMSS 2019 data and simulate likely scenarios regarding the variance in weights. The results show that (i) the different weighting scenarios lead to relatively similar estimates; however, the differences between the scenarios are sufficient to justify the recommendation to use correctly derived teacher weights; (ii) differences between estimated standard errors based on complex sampling and corresponding estimates based on simple random sampling are sufficiently consistent to support use of a procedure to estimate standard errors that accounts for both sample weights and the complex sampling design; (iii) sample sizes and variance in weights significantly limit estimate precision, so that total population estimates with sufficient precision are available in the majority of countries but subpopulation features are generally not sufficiently precise. To provide a critical evaluation of our results, we recommend implementation of the proposed method in one or more countries. This recommended study will permit examination of logistical considerations in implementation of required changes in data acquisition and will provide data to replicate the analysis with teacher-centered weights.