Evaluating a Technology-Based Assessment (TBA) to Measure Teachers’ Action-Related and Reflective Skills

IF 1 Q2 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY International Journal of Testing Pub Date : 2019-04-03 DOI:10.1080/15305058.2019.1586377
O. Zlatkin‐Troitschanskaia, Christiane Kuhn, S. Brückner, Jacqueline P. Leighton
{"title":"Evaluating a Technology-Based Assessment (TBA) to Measure Teachers’ Action-Related and Reflective Skills","authors":"O. Zlatkin‐Troitschanskaia, Christiane Kuhn, S. Brückner, Jacqueline P. Leighton","doi":"10.1080/15305058.2019.1586377","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Teaching performance can be assessed validly only if the assessment involves an appropriate, authentic representation of real-life teaching practices. Different skills interact in coordinating teachers’ actions in different classroom situations. Based on the evidence-centered design model, we developed a technology-based assessment framework that enables differentiation between two essential teaching actions: action-related skills and reflective skills. Action-related skills are necessary to handle specific subject-related situations during instruction. Reflective skills are necessary to prepare and evaluate specific situations in pre- and postinstructional phases. In this article, we present the newly developed technology-based assessment to validly measure teaching performance, and we discuss validity evidence from cognitive interviews with teachers (novices and experts) using the think-aloud method, which indicates that the test takers’ respective mental processes when solving action-related skills tasks are consistent with the theoretically assumed knowledge and skill components and depend on the different levels of teaching expertise.","PeriodicalId":46615,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Testing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/15305058.2019.1586377","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Testing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15305058.2019.1586377","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

Abstract

Teaching performance can be assessed validly only if the assessment involves an appropriate, authentic representation of real-life teaching practices. Different skills interact in coordinating teachers’ actions in different classroom situations. Based on the evidence-centered design model, we developed a technology-based assessment framework that enables differentiation between two essential teaching actions: action-related skills and reflective skills. Action-related skills are necessary to handle specific subject-related situations during instruction. Reflective skills are necessary to prepare and evaluate specific situations in pre- and postinstructional phases. In this article, we present the newly developed technology-based assessment to validly measure teaching performance, and we discuss validity evidence from cognitive interviews with teachers (novices and experts) using the think-aloud method, which indicates that the test takers’ respective mental processes when solving action-related skills tasks are consistent with the theoretically assumed knowledge and skill components and depend on the different levels of teaching expertise.
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
评估基于技术的评估(TBA),以衡量教师的行动相关和反思技能
只有当评估涉及真实、恰当的教学实践时,才能有效地评估教学表现。在不同的课堂情境中,不同的技能在协调教师的行动方面相互作用。基于以证据为中心的设计模型,我们开发了一个基于技术的评估框架,可以区分两种基本的教学行动:行动相关技能和反思技能。在教学过程中,动作相关技能是处理特定主题相关情况所必需的。反思技能对于在教学前和教学后阶段准备和评估具体情况是必要的。在这篇文章中,我们提出了新开发的基于技术的评估来有效地衡量教学表现,并使用大声思考的方法讨论了来自教师(新手和专家)认知访谈的有效性证据,这表明考生在解决与动作相关的技能任务时的心理过程与理论假设的知识和技能成分一致,并取决于不同水平的教学专业知识。
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
International Journal of Testing
International Journal of Testing SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
11.80%
发文量
13
期刊最新文献
Combining Mokken Scale Analysis with and rasch measurement theory to explore differences in measurement quality between subgroups Examining the construct validity of the MIDUS version of the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire (MPQ) Where nonresponse is at its loudest: Cross-country and individual differences in item nonresponse across the PISA 2018 student questionnaire The choice between cognitive diagnosis and item response theory: A case study from medical education Beyond group comparisons: Accounting for intersectional sources of bias in international survey measures
×
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