Exploring the suitability of self-reports to gain insights into teachers’ technological pedagogical knowledge

IF 2.6 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Studies in Educational Evaluation Pub Date : 2024-09-19 DOI:10.1016/j.stueduc.2024.101402
Franziska Baier-Mosch , Lukas Schulze-Vorberg , Holger Horz , Mareike Kunter
{"title":"Exploring the suitability of self-reports to gain insights into teachers’ technological pedagogical knowledge","authors":"Franziska Baier-Mosch ,&nbsp;Lukas Schulze-Vorberg ,&nbsp;Holger Horz ,&nbsp;Mareike Kunter","doi":"10.1016/j.stueduc.2024.101402","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Teachers need high technological pedagogical knowledge (TPK) to integrate digital technology effectively into their teaching. The valid assessment of teachers’ TPK is important so that researchers can investigate its development and impact on student outcomes. However, providing validity evidence for frequently used TPK self-report scales is challenging. Previous studies have indicated only weak correlations between these scales and tests. It remains open whether low correlations are due to method-specific biases of the self-reports or the fact that self-reports and tests measure different constructs (generalized knowledge/self-efficacy vs. specific knowledge). We investigated the relationship between self-report scales and tests of two aspects of teachers’ TPK – TPK-teaching and learning and TPK-classroom management – in a sample of 238 in-service teachers. Results showed that the TPK self-report scales seemed to measure a different construct (more generalized knowledge) than the tests and that low correlations cannot simply be explained by self-report method-specific biases.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47539,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Educational Evaluation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191491X24000816/pdfft?md5=0f3bcb8e4fcb832eb5f927ad6c20eb5e&pid=1-s2.0-S0191491X24000816-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in Educational Evaluation","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191491X24000816","RegionNum":2,"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: 0

Abstract

Teachers need high technological pedagogical knowledge (TPK) to integrate digital technology effectively into their teaching. The valid assessment of teachers’ TPK is important so that researchers can investigate its development and impact on student outcomes. However, providing validity evidence for frequently used TPK self-report scales is challenging. Previous studies have indicated only weak correlations between these scales and tests. It remains open whether low correlations are due to method-specific biases of the self-reports or the fact that self-reports and tests measure different constructs (generalized knowledge/self-efficacy vs. specific knowledge). We investigated the relationship between self-report scales and tests of two aspects of teachers’ TPK – TPK-teaching and learning and TPK-classroom management – in a sample of 238 in-service teachers. Results showed that the TPK self-report scales seemed to measure a different construct (more generalized knowledge) than the tests and that low correlations cannot simply be explained by self-report method-specific biases.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
探索自我报告是否适合深入了解教师的技术教学知识
教师需要具备较高的技术教学知识(TPK),才能有效地将数字技术融入教学。对教师的技术教学知识进行有效评估非常重要,这样研究人员才能调查教师技术教学知识的发展及其对学生成绩的影响。然而,为经常使用的 TPK 自我报告量表提供有效性证据具有挑战性。以往的研究表明,这些量表与测试之间只有微弱的相关性。相关性低究竟是由于自我报告方法的特定偏差,还是由于自我报告和测试测量的是不同的建构(广义知识/自我效能感相对于特定知识),这仍然是一个未知数。我们以 238 名在职教师为样本,研究了自我报告量表与测试之间的关系,这两个方面涉及教师的 "教师专业 知识"--"教与学 "和 "课堂管理"。结果表明,TPK 自我报告量表似乎测量的是与测试不同的结构(更广泛的知识),而低相关性不能简单地用自我报告方法的特定偏差来解释。
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 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
6.50%
发文量
90
审稿时长
62 days
期刊介绍: Studies in Educational Evaluation publishes original reports of evaluation studies. Four types of articles are published by the journal: (a) Empirical evaluation studies representing evaluation practice in educational systems around the world; (b) Theoretical reflections and empirical studies related to issues involved in the evaluation of educational programs, educational institutions, educational personnel and student assessment; (c) Articles summarizing the state-of-the-art concerning specific topics in evaluation in general or in a particular country or group of countries; (d) Book reviews and brief abstracts of evaluation studies.
期刊最新文献
Hitting the mark? A user perspective on the relevance and irrelevance of school performance indicators Predicting the Mathematics Literacy of Resilient Students from High‐performing Economies: A Machine Learning Approach Exploring factors influencing teacher self-efficacy in implementing inclusive education in Cambodia: A two-level hierarchical linear model What value do standardized observation systems add to summative teacher evaluation systems? Investigating anonymity in formative and summative peer assessment: Effects on university students’ social-affective factors, perceptions and preference
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1