DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION OF AN EFL TEACHER TEACHING QUALITY SCALE

Yıl 2023, Cilt: 7 Sayı: 1, 1 - 23, 07.12.2022

Jamshid Ghasemı

Öz

The present study aimed to investigate the factors, features and variables that might affect EFL teachers’ quality and lead to their success or failure in their profes-sional practice. Despite the importance of this concept, no validated instrument was found to measure these constructs. To fill the gap, this study developed and validated a scale of EFL teachers’ quality. A 57 item questionnaire was developed and administered to 334 EFL teachers. We ran Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) to analyze the collected data and test the path model of the study. The reliability and validity of the questionnaires were estimated using exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. The results indicated acceptable goodness of fit indices (Chi-squared=1/789, p < .001, CFI = 0.942, TLI = 0.906, RMSEA= 0.058, SRMR =0.045, AIC =16600 and BIC =17040). The findings of this study have implications for researchers, as well as language teachers and other practitioners in the field of education and teaching quality.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Scale Development, Structural Equation Modeling, Structural Equation Modeling,, Teaching Quality, Teacher Quality Scale

Kaynakça

• Abell, S. (2007). Research on science teachers’ knowledge. In S. Abell & N. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 1105–1149). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Boyd, D., Grossman, P., Ing, M., Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2011). The Influence of School Administrators on Teacher Retention Decisions. American Educational Research Journal, 48(2), 303–333. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831210380788
• Broderick, P., Frank, J., Berrena, E., Schussler, D., Kohler, K., Mitra, J., Khan, L., Levitan, J., Mahfouz, J., Shields, L. & Greenberg, M. (2018). Evaluating the Quality of Mindfulness Instruction Delivered in School Settings: Development and Validation of a Teacher Quality Observational Rating Scale. Mindfulness, 10. 10.1007/s12671-018-0944-x.
• Carroll, J. (1963). A model of school learning. Teachers College Record, 64(8), 723–733.
• Chu, F. (1990). Quantitative evaluation of university teaching quality — an application of fuzzy set and approximate reasoning. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 37(1), 1-11. doi: 10.1016/0165-0114(90)90058-e
• Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). Teacher quality and student achievement: Areview of state policy evidence. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 8(1). Retrieved from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v8n1/.
• Diaz, V., Carek, P., Dickerson, L., & Steyer, T. (2010). Teaching Quality Improvement in a Primary Care Residency. The Joint Commission Journal On Quality and Patient Safety, 36(10), 454-AP5. doi: 10.1016/s1553-7250(10)36067-3.
• Djigic, G., Stojiljković, S. & Dosković, M. (2014). Basic Personality Dimensions and Teachers’ Self-efficacy. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 112. 593- 602. 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.1206.
• Dong, Q., Wang, S., Han, F. & Zhang, R. (2019). Innovative Research and Practice of Teachers’ Teaching Quality Evaluation under the Guidance of ‘Innovation and Entrepreneurship’. Procedia Computer Science, 154. 770-776. 10.1016/j.procs.2019.06.123.
• Dunrong, B. & Fan, M. (2009). On Student Evaluation of Teaching and Improvement of the Teaching Quality Assurance System at Higher Education Institutions. Chinese Education & Society, 42. 100-115. 10.2753/CED1061-1932420212.
• Fairbrother, P. (1996). Recognition and assessment of teaching quality. Nurse education today, 16 1, 69-74.
• Goldstein, J. (2004). Making sense of distributed leadership. Educational Evaluation & Policy Analysis, 26(2), 173–197.
• Goldstein, J., & Noguera, P. (2006). A thoughtful approach to teacher evaluation. Educational Leadership, 63(6), 31–37.
• Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structureanalysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural EquatModeling, 6, 1e55 Jasman,
• A., Blass, E. & Shelley, S. (2013). Becoming an Academic for the Twenty-First Century: What Will Count as Teaching Quality in Higher Education. Policy Futures in Education, 11. 660. 10.2304/pfie.2013.11.6.660.
• Larsen, R. J., Buss, D. M., Wismeijer, A., Song, J., & van den Berg, S. M. (2017). Personality psychology: Domains of knowledge about human nature. (2nd ed.) McGraw Hill Education.
• Lazarides, R., & Buchholz, J. (2019). Student-perceived teaching quality: How is it related to different achievement emotions in mathematics classrooms?. Learning and Instruction, 61, 45-59. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2019.01.001
• Li, X. F. (2012). The ideal and reality of students’ evaluation: The study based on the fourth generation evaluation theory[D]. Beijing: Beijing Normal University.
• Maslow, V. & Kelley, C. (2012). Does Evaluation Advance Teaching Practice? The Effects of Performance Evaluation on Teaching Quality and System Change in
• Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for integrating technology in teachers’ knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054.
• Mosser, G., Frisch, K., Skarda, P. & Gertner, E. (2009). Addressing the Challenges in Teaching Quality Improvement. The American journal of medicine, 122. 487-91. 10.1016/j.amjmed.2009.01.013.
• Moyer-Packenham, P. S., Bolyard, J. J., Kitsantas, A., & Oh, H. (2008). The assessment of mathematics and science teacher quality. Peabody Journal of Education, 83(4), 562–591.
• Ome, A., Menendez, A. & Le, H. (2017). Improving teaching quality through training: Evidence from the Caucasus. Economics of Education Review, 61. 10.1016/j.econedurev.2017.09.003.
• Pintrich, P. R. & Schunk, D. H. (2002). Motivation in education: theory, research, and applications. Merrill, Prentice-Hall International.
• Ren, W. (2009). Reinforcement on Teachers’ Morality Construction --- An Eternal Subject in Educational Development. Asian Culture and History, 1.10.5539/achv1n2p180.
• Roman, I. (2014). Qualitative Methods for Determining Students’ Satisfaction with Teaching Quality. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 149 (2014) 825 –830
• Schmidt-Crawford, D., Baran, E., Thompson, A., Mishra, P., Koehler, M. & Seob, S. (2009). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK): the development and validation of an assessment instrument for preservice Teachers. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42. 123-149. 10.1080/15391523.2009.10782544.
• Shulman, L. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14.
• Singh, R. & Sarkar. S. (2015). Does teaching quality matter? Students learning outcome related to teaching quality in public and private primary schools in India. International Journal of Educational Development, 41 (2015) 153–163
• Spooren, P., Mortelmans, D. & Denekens, J. (2007). Student evaluation of teaching quality in higher education: development of an instrument based on 10 Likert‐scales. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 32:6, 667-679, DOI: 10.1080/02602930601117191
• Üstünlüoğlu, E. (2017). Teaching quality matters in higher education: a case study from Turkey and Slovakia. Teachers and Teaching, 23, 367 - 382.
• Uygun, S. (2013). English Language Teaching Quality Criteria in Turkish Secondary Education (based on EAQUALS’ Staff Charter). Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 70. 1354-1359. 10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.01.197.
• Xian, S., Xia, H., Yin, Y., Zhai, Z. & Shang, Y. (2016). Principal component clustering approach to teaching quality discriminant analysis. Cogent Education, 3:1, DOI: 10.1080/2331186X.2016.1194553
• Yang, S. (2018). Construction research on index system of teaching quality of distance education. Journal of Discrete Mathematical Sciences and Cryptography, 21:6, 1431-1436, DOI: 10.1080/09720529.2018.152748