How to Measure Quality of Delivery: Focus on Teaching Practices That Help Students to Develop Proximal Outcomes

IF 1.7 4区 教育学 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness Pub Date : 2022-04-15 DOI:10.1080/19345747.2022.2054481
Diego Catalán Molina, Tenelle Porter, Catherine Oberle, Misha D. Haghighat, Afiya C. Fredericks, Kristen Budd, Sylvia Roberts, L. Blackwell, Kali Trzesniewski
{"title":"How to Measure Quality of Delivery: Focus on Teaching Practices That Help Students to Develop Proximal Outcomes","authors":"Diego Catalán Molina, Tenelle Porter, Catherine Oberle, Misha D. Haghighat, Afiya C. Fredericks, Kristen Budd, Sylvia Roberts, L. Blackwell, Kali Trzesniewski","doi":"10.1080/19345747.2022.2054481","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Recent studies have suggested that quality of delivery matters to achieve better student outcomes in the context of school interventions. However, studies rarely measure quality of delivery and test its association with students’ outcomes, perhaps due to lack of clarity regarding how to measure it. Here, we offer recommendations on how to select or design measures of quality of delivery. These recommendations focus on identifying teaching practices that help students to develop proximal outcomes during the delivery of an intervention. Additionally, we illustrate an application of these recommendations to the study of quality of delivery in a cluster-randomized efficacy study of Brainology, a program that promotes students’ motivation and learning. We found that, although teachers fluctuated in their quality of delivery across lessons, students who received the intervention with higher quality of delivery on average increased more in targeted proximal outcomes (effort beliefs and learning goals) than students exposed to low quality. We discuss these results in terms of their implications for measuring quality of delivery, supporting teachers, and studying the conditions that make school interventions successful.","PeriodicalId":47260,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness","volume":"15 1","pages":"898 - 923"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19345747.2022.2054481","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Abstract Recent studies have suggested that quality of delivery matters to achieve better student outcomes in the context of school interventions. However, studies rarely measure quality of delivery and test its association with students’ outcomes, perhaps due to lack of clarity regarding how to measure it. Here, we offer recommendations on how to select or design measures of quality of delivery. These recommendations focus on identifying teaching practices that help students to develop proximal outcomes during the delivery of an intervention. Additionally, we illustrate an application of these recommendations to the study of quality of delivery in a cluster-randomized efficacy study of Brainology, a program that promotes students’ motivation and learning. We found that, although teachers fluctuated in their quality of delivery across lessons, students who received the intervention with higher quality of delivery on average increased more in targeted proximal outcomes (effort beliefs and learning goals) than students exposed to low quality. We discuss these results in terms of their implications for measuring quality of delivery, supporting teachers, and studying the conditions that make school interventions successful.
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
如何衡量教学质量:关注教学实践,帮助学生发展近期成果
最近的研究表明,在学校干预的背景下,交付质量对实现更好的学生成绩很重要。然而,研究很少衡量教学质量,并测试其与学生成绩的关系,这可能是由于缺乏明确的衡量方法。在这里,我们就如何选择或设计交付质量措施提出建议。这些建议侧重于确定教学实践,以帮助学生在实施干预期间发展近端结果。此外,我们举例说明了这些建议在脑学的集群随机疗效研究中的应用,脑学是一个促进学生动机和学习的项目。我们发现,尽管教师的教学质量在课堂上有所波动,但平均而言,接受教学质量较高干预的学生在目标近端结果(努力信念和学习目标)方面比接受低质量干预的学生有更多的提高。我们将讨论这些结果对衡量教学质量、支持教师以及研究使学校干预成功的条件的影响。
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
Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness
Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
11.10%
发文量
37
期刊介绍: As the flagship publication for the Society for Research on Educational Effectiveness, the Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness (JREE) publishes original articles from the multidisciplinary community of researchers who are committed to applying principles of scientific inquiry to the study of educational problems. Articles published in JREE should advance our knowledge of factors important for educational success and/or improve our ability to conduct further disciplined studies of pressing educational problems. JREE welcomes manuscripts that fit into one of the following categories: (1) intervention, evaluation, and policy studies; (2) theory, contexts, and mechanisms; and (3) methodological studies. The first category includes studies that focus on process and implementation and seek to demonstrate causal claims in educational research. The second category includes meta-analyses and syntheses, descriptive studies that illuminate educational conditions and contexts, and studies that rigorously investigate education processes and mechanism. The third category includes studies that advance our understanding of theoretical and technical features of measurement and research design and describe advances in data analysis and data modeling. To establish a stronger connection between scientific evidence and educational practice, studies submitted to JREE should focus on pressing problems found in classrooms and schools. Studies that help advance our understanding and demonstrate effectiveness related to challenges in reading, mathematics education, and science education are especially welcome as are studies related to cognitive functions, social processes, organizational factors, and cultural features that mediate and/or moderate critical educational outcomes. On occasion, invited responses to JREE articles and rejoinders to those responses will be included in an issue.
期刊最新文献
Does Teacher Professional Development Improve Student Learning? Evidence from Leading Educators’ Fellowship Model Addressing Missing Data Due to COVID-19: Two Early Childhood Case Studies The Impact of Community Eligibility Provision on Multilingual Learner Outcomes Oceania in the Desert: A QuantCrit Analysis of the (Under)Counting of Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander Students at an AANAPISI-HSI Growth on 2019 State Achievement Tests: Empirical Benchmarks and the Role of Scale Choice
×
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