用BARS进行问卷心理测量分析。有机会在认证过程中改进教学效果评估程序和决策

IF 0.7 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Revista Interuniversitaria de Formacion del Profesorado-RIFOP Pub Date : 2023-04-26 DOI:10.47553/rifop.v98i37.1.97313
Luis Matosas-López, Jessus Miguel Muñoz-Cantero, D. Molero, Eva-María Espiñeira-Bellón
{"title":"用BARS进行问卷心理测量分析。有机会在认证过程中改进教学效果评估程序和决策","authors":"Luis Matosas-López, Jessus Miguel Muñoz-Cantero, D. Molero, Eva-María Espiñeira-Bellón","doi":"10.47553/rifop.v98i37.1.97313","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the field of teaching effectiveness measurement programs, studies on the validation of Behavioral Anchored Rating Scales (BARS) are minimal when compared with Likert instruments. The reason for this situation is a consequence of the limited number of universities opting for this type of questionnaire in their teaching effectiveness measurement programs. This situation is due to the thoroughness, time investment and strong involvement of human resources required in the design of these scales. The aim of this investigation is twofold. On the one hand, to analyze the validity of a questionnaire for measuring teaching effectiveness that uses BARS. On the other, to check whether this instrument, designed in a given university with the participation of the professors and students of this institution, can be valid for other universities. The study is carried out in three Spanish universities. The validation process considers: comprehension validity, EFA, CFA with structural equation modeling, and reliability analysis. The results show that BARS under examination are valid for measuring teaching effectiveness; not only in the institution where they are designed, but also in other universities different from the one in which the questionnaire is constructed. The findings of this research open new alternatives not only to improve teaching effectiveness measurement programs but also to enhance decision making in accreditation processes.","PeriodicalId":43440,"journal":{"name":"Revista Interuniversitaria de Formacion del Profesorado-RIFOP","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Psychometric analysis of a questionnaire with BARS. An opportunity to improve teaching effectiveness measurement programs and decision making in accreditation processes\",\"authors\":\"Luis Matosas-López, Jessus Miguel Muñoz-Cantero, D. Molero, Eva-María Espiñeira-Bellón\",\"doi\":\"10.47553/rifop.v98i37.1.97313\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In the field of teaching effectiveness measurement programs, studies on the validation of Behavioral Anchored Rating Scales (BARS) are minimal when compared with Likert instruments. The reason for this situation is a consequence of the limited number of universities opting for this type of questionnaire in their teaching effectiveness measurement programs. This situation is due to the thoroughness, time investment and strong involvement of human resources required in the design of these scales. The aim of this investigation is twofold. On the one hand, to analyze the validity of a questionnaire for measuring teaching effectiveness that uses BARS. On the other, to check whether this instrument, designed in a given university with the participation of the professors and students of this institution, can be valid for other universities. The study is carried out in three Spanish universities. The validation process considers: comprehension validity, EFA, CFA with structural equation modeling, and reliability analysis. The results show that BARS under examination are valid for measuring teaching effectiveness; not only in the institution where they are designed, but also in other universities different from the one in which the questionnaire is constructed. The findings of this research open new alternatives not only to improve teaching effectiveness measurement programs but also to enhance decision making in accreditation processes.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43440,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Revista Interuniversitaria de Formacion del Profesorado-RIFOP\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Revista Interuniversitaria de Formacion del Profesorado-RIFOP\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.47553/rifop.v98i37.1.97313\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Interuniversitaria de Formacion del Profesorado-RIFOP","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47553/rifop.v98i37.1.97313","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在教学有效性测量项目领域,与李克特量表相比,对行为锚定评定量表(Behavioral anchor Rating Scales, BARS)有效性的研究较少。造成这种情况的原因是有限的大学选择这种类型的问卷在他们的教学效果测量计划的结果。这种情况是由于这些比额表的设计需要周密、时间投入和人力资源的大力参与。这项调查的目的是双重的。一方面,运用BARS对教学效果测评问卷进行效度分析。另一方面,检查在某所大学设计并由该大学的教授和学生参与的该工具是否可以在其他大学有效。这项研究是在三所西班牙大学进行的。验证过程考虑:理解效度、结构方程模型的EFA、CFA和信度分析。结果表明,考试中的BARS可以有效地衡量教学效果;不仅在设计问卷的机构,而且在其他不同于问卷构建的大学。本研究的发现不仅为改进教学有效性评估程序,而且为加强认证过程中的决策提供了新的选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Psychometric analysis of a questionnaire with BARS. An opportunity to improve teaching effectiveness measurement programs and decision making in accreditation processes
In the field of teaching effectiveness measurement programs, studies on the validation of Behavioral Anchored Rating Scales (BARS) are minimal when compared with Likert instruments. The reason for this situation is a consequence of the limited number of universities opting for this type of questionnaire in their teaching effectiveness measurement programs. This situation is due to the thoroughness, time investment and strong involvement of human resources required in the design of these scales. The aim of this investigation is twofold. On the one hand, to analyze the validity of a questionnaire for measuring teaching effectiveness that uses BARS. On the other, to check whether this instrument, designed in a given university with the participation of the professors and students of this institution, can be valid for other universities. The study is carried out in three Spanish universities. The validation process considers: comprehension validity, EFA, CFA with structural equation modeling, and reliability analysis. The results show that BARS under examination are valid for measuring teaching effectiveness; not only in the institution where they are designed, but also in other universities different from the one in which the questionnaire is constructed. The findings of this research open new alternatives not only to improve teaching effectiveness measurement programs but also to enhance decision making in accreditation processes.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
20.00%
发文量
32
审稿时长
30 weeks
期刊最新文献
Los juegos tradicionales como potenciadores de la inclusión sociopsicomotriz en estudiantes de educación primaria con dificultad de aprendizaje Percepciones del autoconcepto en estudiantes de Educación Secundaria Obligatoria a través de la mediación artística Diseño e implementación de un modelo Aprendizaje-Servicio dirigido a los Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible aplicando técnicas de codiseño Tendencias homofóbicas en estudiantes de educación infantil en Chile: Un estudio cuantitativo transversal Jornadas deportivas sensibilizadoras. Una herramienta para la inclusión
×
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