An Appraisal of the CLASS Instrument as an Observational Measurement Tool for Evaluation of Student and Teacher Interactions in Western Australian Classrooms

Pub Date : 2022-06-01 DOI:10.14221/ajte.2022v47n6.6
Gillian Kirk, Marianne Knaus, Shane Rogers
{"title":"An Appraisal of the CLASS Instrument as an Observational Measurement Tool for Evaluation of Student and Teacher Interactions in Western Australian Classrooms","authors":"Gillian Kirk, Marianne Knaus, Shane Rogers","doi":"10.14221/ajte.2022v47n6.6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The National Quality Framework is used across Australia to drive quality improvement in early childhood settings. Unique to Western Australia, the National Quality Standard is also used in schools to improve quality in classrooms up to Year two (seven to eight years). However, the literature suggests the National Quality Standard is too broad with an emphasis on quantifiable program features (structural quality). As the Classroom Assessment Scoring System (CLASS™) instrument was designed to measure classroom interactions (process quality), the purpose of this current study was to examine its efficacy in Pre-primary (five-year-old) classrooms. A mixed-method research approach was employed to appraise the CLASS instrument as an observational measurement tool for evaluation of quality student and teacher interactions in schools. The quantitative methods involved a statistical analysis of the CLASS instrument ratings and observations and interviews provided a qualitative perspective. Study conclusions suggest that while CLASS offered useful descriptions of quality in Emotional Support and Classroom Organisation, the Instructional Support scores were not consistent with other indicators of quality, and this score was not representative of the instructional quality in some classrooms.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2022v47n6.6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

The National Quality Framework is used across Australia to drive quality improvement in early childhood settings. Unique to Western Australia, the National Quality Standard is also used in schools to improve quality in classrooms up to Year two (seven to eight years). However, the literature suggests the National Quality Standard is too broad with an emphasis on quantifiable program features (structural quality). As the Classroom Assessment Scoring System (CLASS™) instrument was designed to measure classroom interactions (process quality), the purpose of this current study was to examine its efficacy in Pre-primary (five-year-old) classrooms. A mixed-method research approach was employed to appraise the CLASS instrument as an observational measurement tool for evaluation of quality student and teacher interactions in schools. The quantitative methods involved a statistical analysis of the CLASS instrument ratings and observations and interviews provided a qualitative perspective. Study conclusions suggest that while CLASS offered useful descriptions of quality in Emotional Support and Classroom Organisation, the Instructional Support scores were not consistent with other indicators of quality, and this score was not representative of the instructional quality in some classrooms.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
对CLASS仪器作为西澳大利亚课堂师生互动评价的观察性测量工具的评价
全国质量框架在澳大利亚各地使用,以推动早期儿童环境的质量提高。西澳大利亚独有的国家质量标准也被用于学校,以提高到第二年(7到8年)的课堂质量。然而,文献表明,国家质量标准过于宽泛,强调可量化的程序特征(结构质量)。由于课堂评估评分系统(CLASS™)工具旨在衡量课堂互动(过程质量),因此本研究的目的是检验其在学前(五岁)课堂中的有效性。采用混合方法研究方法来评估CLASS工具作为评估学校学生和教师互动质量的观察性测量工具。定量方法涉及对CLASS工具评级的统计分析,观察和访谈提供了定性视角。研究结论表明,尽管CLASS在情感支持和课堂组织方面提供了有用的质量描述,但教学支持分数与其他质量指标不一致,并且该分数不能代表某些课堂的教学质量。
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
×
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