Pre-service Teachers' Perceptions of Ethical Principles in Assessment: A Logistic Regression Analysis Study

Öz

The aim of this study is to determine the extent to which pre-service teacher percept of ethical principles in assessment. Another aim of the study is to examine how gender and grade level predict these perception levels. The sample of the study, in which the explanatory correlational design was used, consisted of 882 pre-service teachers. In the analysis of the data, firstly the alignment between participants' perceptions and expert opinions on ethical principles in various scenarios was examined. The aim of this study is to determine the extent to which pre-service teacher percept of ethical principles in assessment. Another aim of the study is to examine how gender and grade level predict these perception levels. The sample of the study, in which the explanatory correlational design was used, consisted of 882 pre-service teachers. In the analysis of the data, firstly the alignment between participants' perceptions and expert opinions on ethical principles in various scenarios was examined. As a result, it was determined that the participants had similar views with the experts in most of the scenarios. In addition, it was determined that the agreement percentages of female pre-service teachers were higher than their male counterparts. In terms of grade level, participants’ perceptions of ethical principles were found to be generally similar across different year groups. Binary Logistic Regression Analysis was used to examine the degree to which gender and grade level predicted participants' perceptions of ethical principles in assessment. In certain scenarios, both gender and grade level variables were found to significantly predict the level of perception of ethical principles. Various suggestions were made in line with the results and limitations of the study.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Assessment
• Ethics
• Perception
• Logistic Regression Analysis
• Pre-service Teacher.

Öğretmen Adaylarının Ölçme ve Değerlendirmede Etik İlkelere Yönelik Algıları: Bir Lojistik Regresyon Analizi Çalışması

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, öğretmen adaylarının ölçme ve değerlendirmede etik ilkeleri algılama düzeylerinin belirlenmesidir. Çalışmanın bir diğer amacı ise cinsiyet ve sınıf seviyesinin katılımcıların algı düzeylerini yordama derecesini incelemektir. Nicel araştırma desenlerinden keşfedici korelasyonel desenin kullanıldığı araştırmanın örneklemini 882 öğretmen adayı oluşturmaktadır. Araştırma kapsamında ilk olarak öğretmen adaylarının ölçme ve değerlendirmede etik ilkeleri algılama düzeylerinin uzmanlarla uyumu incelenmiştir. İnceleme sonucunda katılımcıların senaryoların büyük bir kısmında uzmanlarla benzer görüşlere sahip oldukları belirlenmiştir. Ayrıca senaryoların çoğunda kadın öğretmen adaylarının uzmanlarla uyum yüzdelerinin erkeklere kıyasla daha yüksek olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Diğer yandan senaryoların çoğunluğunda öğretmen adaylarının etik ilkeleri algılama düzeylerinin sınıf seviyeleri açısından benzer olduğu belirlenmiştir. Cinsiyet ve sınıf düzeyinin katılımcıların ölçme ve değerlendirmede etik ilkeleri algılama düzeylerini yordama derecelerini incelemek için İkili Lojistik Regresyon Analizi kullanılmıştır. Bazı senaryolarda cinsiyet ve sınıf düzeyi değişkenlerinin etik ilkeleri algılama düzeylerini anlamlı olarak yordadığı tespit edilmiştir. Çalışmada elde edilen sonuçlar ve sınırlılıklar doğrultusunda çeşitli önerilerde bulunulmuştur

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Ölçme ve Değerlendirme
• Etik
• Algı
• Lojistik Regresyon Analizi
• Öğretmen adayı

Kaynakça

1. Abadiano, H., & Turner, J. (2003). Thinking it through: re-examining our beliefs about assessment for diverse students. The New England Reading Association Journal, 39, 58–63.
2. Abell, S. K., & Siegel, M. A. (2011). Assessment literacy: What science teachers need to know and be able to do? In D. Corrigan, J. Dillon, & R. Gunstone (Eds.), The professional knowledge base of science teaching (pp. 205–221). Springer.
3. Aktaş, M., & Alıcı, D. (2012). Development of likert type attitude scale towards measurement and evaluation in education course. Journal of Qafqaz University, Philology and Pedagogy, 33, 66–73.
4. Alkharusi, H. A. (2016). Measuring teachers’ adherence to ethical principles in educational assessment. Asian Social Science, 12(4), 149–158. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ass.v12n4p149
5. Altun, A. (2017). An investigation of prospective teachers’ attitudes towards and perception of competency level at measurement and evaluation lesson. Kafkas University Journal of the Institute of Social Sciences, (20), 361–375. https://doi.org/10.9775/kausbed.2017.023
6. Aslan, S. (2020). An investigation of prospective teachers attitudes for measurement assessment in terms of various variables. OPUS–International Journal of Society Researches, 16 (Education and Society Special Issue), 6047–6068. https://doi.org/10.26466/opus.755991
7. Bergman, D. J. (2013). Pre-service teachers' perceptions about ethical practices in student evaluation. Issues in Teacher Education, 22(1), 29–48.
8. Bergman, D. J. (2018). Pre-service teachers' pliable perceptions of ethical practices in student evaluation. Issues in Teacher Education, 27(3), 5–23.

9. Birgin, O., & Gürbüz, R. (2008). Examining the knowledge levels of pre-service elementary teacher on measurement and evaluation. The Journal of Selçuk University Social Sciences Institute, (20), 163–179.
10. Brookhart, S. M., & Nitko, A. J. (2008). Assessment and grading in classrooms. Pearson.
11. Buldur, S., Acar, M., & Toprak, Ö. F. (2017). Pre-service elemantary teachers’ beliefs about assessment. (ESTUDAM) Journal of Education, 2(2), 46–63.
12. Can, A. (2022). Quantitative data analysis in scientific research process with SPSS (10th ed.). Pegem Akademi Publishing.
13. Can, E. (2017). English teachers’ classroom assessment practices and their views about the ethics of classroom assessment practies [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Çağ University.
14. Cirlan, E. (2017). Ethical classroom assessment: differences for preservice and in-service teachers in Finland. [Unpublished master’s thesis]. University of Oulu.
15. Cizek, G. J. (1997). Learning, achievement, and assessment: Constructs at a crossroads. In G. D. Phye (Ed.), Handbook of classroom assessment: Learning, adjustment, and achievement. CA: Academic Press.
16. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2005). Research methods in education (5th ed.). Routledge Falmer. Colnerud, G. (1997). Ethical conflicts in teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 13(6), 627–635. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(97)80005-4
17. Council of Higher Education (CHE). (2018). Teacher training undergraduate programs. https://www.yok.gov.tr/kurumsal/idari-birimler/egitim-ogretim-dairesi/yeni-ogretmen-yetistirme-lisans-programlari Accessed on 26.11.2023.
18. Cunningham, G. K. (1998). Assessment in the classroom: Constructing and interpreting texts. Falmer Press.
19. Çardak, Ç. S. (2018). Attitudes of prospective teachers towards measurement and assessment course: Anadolu university example. Adıyaman University Journal of Social Sciences, (29), 401–453. https://doi.org/10.14520/adyusbd.398714
20. Çokluk, Ö., Şekercioğlu, G., & Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2021). Multivariate statistics for the social sciences: Applications of SPSS and LISREL (6th ed.). Pegem Akademi Publishing.
21. Çıngı, H. (1994). Sampling theory (2nd ed.). Hacettepe University Printing House.
22. Darabi Bazvand, A. (2023). Exploring student teachers’ perceptions of assessment ethics across university-based teacher education programs in Iran. Language Testing in Asia, 13(9), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40468-022-00205-1
23. Darabi Bazvand, A., Rezai, A., & Miri, M. (2023). Doctoral students’ perceptions of assessment ethics: a phenomenological approach in the context of Iran. Higher Education Research & Development, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2023.2203466
24. Demirtaşlı, R. N. (2017). Relationships between learning, teaching and assessment. Demirtaşlı, R. N. (Ed.). Measurement and evaluation in education (4th ed.) (pp. 1–24). Anı Publishing.
25. Estaji, M. (2011). Ethics and validity stance in educational assessment. English Language and Literature Studies, 1(2), 89–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ells.v1n2p89
26. Fan, X., Johnson, R., & Liu, X. (2017). Chinese university professors' perceptions about ethical issues in classroom assessment practices. New Waves-Educational Research and Development Journal, 20(2), 1–19.
27. Fan, X., Johnson, R., Liu, J., Zhang, X., Liu, X., & Zhang, T. (2019). A comparative study of pre-service teachers’ views on ethical issues in classroom assessment in China and the United States. Frontiers of Education in China, 14(2), 309–332. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11516-019-0015-7
28. Fan, X., Johnson, R., Liu, X., & Gao, R. (2022). College students’ views of ethical issues in classroom assessment in Chinese higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 47(1), 131–145. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2020.1732908
29. Fan, X., Liu, X., & Johnson, R. L. (2020). A mixed method study of ethical issues in classroom assessment in Chinese higher education. Asia Pacific Education Review, 21(2), 183–195. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-019-09623-y
30. Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS (3rd ed.). Sage Publication.
31. Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education (8th ed.). McGraw-Hill.
32. Gao, R., Liu, X., & Fan, X. (2022). Factors associated with Chinese undergraduates’ perceptions of the ethical issues in classroom assessment practices-a mixed methods study. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-022-09380-4
33. Göçer, V. (2020). Analysis of faculty of education students’ attitudes towards education measurement and evaluation course. The Journal of Interdisciplinary Educational Research, 4(8), 212–228.
34. Gözütok, F. D. (1999). Teachers’ ethical behaviours. Ankara University Journal of Faculty of Educational Sciences, 32(1), 83–99. https://doi.org/10.1501/Egifak_0000000021
35. Green, S. K., & Johnson, R. L. (2010). Assessment is essential. McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
36. Green, S. K., Johnson, R. L., Kim, D. H., & Pope, N. S. (2007). Ethics in classroom assessment practices: Issues and attitudes. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(7), 999–1011. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2006.04.042
37. Gronlund, N. (2003). Assessment of student achievement (7th ed.). Allyn and Bacon.
38. Hosmer, D. W., & Lemeshow, S. (2000). Applied logistic regression (2nd ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
39. İlhan, M., Güler, N., & Kinay, İ. (2017). The Turkish adaptation of the adherence to ethical principles in educational assessment scale. Abant İzzet Baysal University Journal of Faculty of Education, 17(2), 779–795. https://doi.org/10.17240/aibuefd.2017.17.30227-326597
40. İzci, K., & Şardağ, M. (2016). Prospective science teachers’ perception of classroom assessment. Necatibey Faculty of Education Electronic Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 10(1), 439–471. https://doi.org/10.17522/nefefmed.94931
41. Johnson, R. L., Green, S. K., Kim, D. H., & Pope, N. S. (2008). Educational leaders' perceptions about ethical practices in student evaluation. American Journal of Evaluation, 29(4), 520–530. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214008322803
42. Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation (JCSEE). (2003). The student evaluation standards. Corwin Press.
43. Kaya, U. (2021). Attitudes of students of faculty of theology towards measurement and assessment course. Turkish Journal of Religious Education Studies, (12), 121–145. https://doi.org/10.53112/tudear.1051385
44. Kline, P. (2000). Handbook of psychological testing (2nd ed.). Routledge.
45. Linn, R. (1990). Essentials of student assessment: from accountability to instructional aid. Teachers College Record, 91(3), 422–436. http://doi.org/10.1177/016146819009100303
46. Liu, J., Johnson, R., & Fan, X. (2016). A comparative study of Chinese and United States pre-service teachers’ perceptions about ethical issues in classroom assessment. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 48, 57–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2016.01.002
47. Liu, X., Fan, X., Guo, H., Zhang, X., & Gu, M. (2024). Chinese secondary school teachers’ views on ethical issues in classroom assessment. Asia Pacific Education Review, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-024-09948-3
48. Maxwell, B., & Schwimmer, M. (2016). Professional ethics education for future teachers: A narrative review of the scholarly writings. Journal of Moral Education, 45(3), 354–371. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057240.2016.1204271
49. McMillan, J. H., & Workman, D. J. (1998). Classroom assessment and grading practices: A review of the literature. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No: ED453263).
50. Nitko, A. J., & Brookhart, S. M. (2014). Educational assessment of students (6th ed.). Pearson.
51. Oosterhof, A. (2009). Developing and using classroom assessments. Merrill Publishing.
52. Ory, J., & Ryan, K. (1993). Tips for improving testing and grading. Sage Publications.
53. Ozan, C., & Kıncal, R. Y. (2017). An investigation of teacher candidates’ attitudes towards educational measurement in terms of various variables. Turkish Journal of Teacher Education, 6(1), 18–32.
54. Pope, N. S. (2006). Do no harm to whom? An examination of ethics and assessment. South Atlantic Philosophy of Education Society Yearbook, 25–31.
55. Schmeiser, C. B. (1995). Ethics in assessment. ERIC Digest.
56. Şahin, Ç., & Karaman, P. (2013). Preservice elementary teachers’ assessment beliefs. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 28(2), 394–407.
57. Şimşek, Ü., & Kılcan, B. (2022). An investigation of social studies teacher candidates’ attitudes towards measurement and evaluation course in education from the framework various variables. Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies in Education, 6(1), 1–13.
58. Thorndike, R. M., Cunningham, G. K., Thorndike, R. L., & Hagen, E. P. (1991). Measurement and evaluation in psychology and education. Macmillan Publishing Co Inc.
59. Tierney, R. D. (2014). Fairness as a multifaceted quality in classroom assessment. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 43, 55–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2013.12.003
60. Wiggins, G. (1994). None of the Above. Executive Educator, 16(7), 14–18.
61. Wynne, E. A. (1995). The moral dimension of teaching. In A. C. Ornstein (Ed.), Teaching: Theory into practice. (pp. 190–202). Allyn & Bacon.
62. Yaşar, M. (2014). An investigation of candidate teachers’ attitude towards “measurement and evaluation in education” course in terms of some variables. Trakya University Journal of Education, 4(2), 64–83.
63. Yıldız, B. E., & Buldur, S. (2024). Pre-service teachers’ perception levels of ethical principles in assessment. Dokuz Eylül University Journal of Buca Faculty of Education, (62), 2679–2696. https://doi.org/10.53444/deubefd.1413702
64. Yıldız, V., & Kinay, İ. (2020). Investigating the level of secondary school teacher’s adherence to ethical principles in educational assessment. İnternational Journal of Eurasia Social Sciences, 11(41), 863–892. http://dx.doi.org/10.35826/ijoess.2732