Improving Measurement of Teacher Performance: Alternative Scoring for Classroom-Based Observational Systems

The study examines reliability and validity evidence of observational systems for evaluating teacher effectiveness and fostering professional development conversations in schools. Specifically, this study compared the Framework for Teaching's (FFT) validity evidence using the traditional scorin...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Educational assessment 2022-07, Vol.27 (3), p.269-284
Main Authors: Kettler, Ryan J., Hua, Anh, Dudek, Christopher M., Reddy, Linda A., Arnold-Berkovits, Ilona, Wiggs, Nicole B., Lekwa, Adam, Kurz, Alexander
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Alternative Assessment
Charter Schools
Classroom Observation Techniques
Educational tests & measurements
Elementary School Teachers
High School Teachers
Low Income Students
Mathematics Teachers
Middle School Teachers
Reading Teachers
Teacher Effectiveness
Teacher Evaluation
Teacher evaluations
Test Reliability
Test Validity
Urban Schools
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The study examines reliability and validity evidence of observational systems for evaluating teacher effectiveness and fostering professional development conversations in schools. Specifically, this study compared the Framework for Teaching's (FFT) validity evidence using the traditional scoring approach with a new composite scoring approach that averages the components nested within each domain. The study was conducted with a sample of 85 teachers and 10 school administrators from five high-poverty charter schools. Overall, the findings build on previous research, offering additional evidence for using alternative scoring methods for the classroom observational measures. The FFT composite scores are internally consistent at the domain and total levels, as well as more stable across time compared to the traditional scoring approach. Implications for research and practice are discussed.
ISSN:1062-7197
1532-6977
DOI:10.1080/10627197.2022.2088494