A factor analysis of K-12 student feedback items and the association of these items to criterion-referenced tests in reading, language arts, and mathematics

Abstract

CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION The following study was designed to exaxnine items from a set of K-I2 teacher evaluation instruments. The results of this study can be added to two decades of research by the School Improvement Model Center at Iowa State University. This center has focused on validating and improving these instruments as part of a total systems approach to teacher performance evaluation. 4 3. increase accountability by making a connection between the evaluation of teachers measured against how well smdents are learning in reading, language arts, and mathematics. Objectives of the Smdy The objectives of this smdy were to 1) factor analyze items from four (K-2, 3-5, 6-8, and 9-12) smdent feedback instruments to determine if item variables from each of the instruments cluster around common subscale factors; 2) determine if a relationship exists between items from each of the instnmients and student achievement scores in three subject areas; reading, language arts, and mathematics; 3) identify additional teaching behaviors and practices associated with effective mathematics, reading, and language arts instruction and create new items; and 4) pilot test the new items for reliability and discrimination. Research Questions This study is directed by the following questions: la. Will the 20 items from the K-2 smdent feedback instrument factor into subscales as identified by Dietz (1996) and Danielson (1996)? lb. Will the 20 items from the 3-5 smdent feedback instrument factor into subscales as identified by Dietz (1996) and Danielson (1996)? Ic. Will the 20 items from the 6-8 smdent feedback instrument factor into subscales as identified by Dietz (1996) and Danielson (1996)? Id. Will the 20 items from the 9-12 smdent feedback instrument factor into subscales as identified by Dietz (1996) and Danielson (1996)? 2a. Will factor subscales from the K-2 smdent feedback instrument be statistically reliable? 5 2b. Will factor subscales from the 3-5 stodent feedback instrument be sutistically reliable? 2c. Will factor subscales from the 6-8 smdent feedback instrument be statistically reliable? 2d. Will factor subscales from the 9-12 smdent feedback instrument be statistically reliable? 3a. Will there be an association between items from the K-2 smdent feedback instrument with smdent achievement in reading, language arts, and math? 3b. Will there be an association between items from the 3-5 smdent feedback instrument with smdent achievement in reading, language arts, and math? 3c. Will there be an association between items from the 6-8 smdent feedback instrument with smdent achievement in reading, language arts, and math? 3d. Will there be an association between items from the 9-12 smdent feedback instrument with smdent achievement in reading, language arts, and math? 4a. Will the modified and/or new items from the K-2 instrument be statistically reliable and discriminating (ability to sort)? 4b. WiU the modified and/or new items from the 3-5 instrument be sutistically reliable and discriminating (ability to sort)? 4c. Will ...

The development and testing of a compendium of model strategies for performance improvement of special education personnel of K-12 schools

“…4. The findings of previous research conducted by Hidlebaugh (1973), Judkins (1987), Weber (1992), Omotani (1992), Wilcox (1995), Wilkerson (1997), and Kayona (1999), which refined the feedback instruments as to the validity, reliability, and item discrimination, are accepted for the purposes of this investigation.…”

“…Festinger's (1989) Theory of Cognitive Dissonance postulates when individuals are expected to behave or act in a manner inconsistent with how they feel, with what they believe, or with what they know. Given this theory, a gap or imbalance exits whenever teachers discover that their attitudes or perceptions of their teaching differ from that of their students or supervisors (Kayona, 1999).…”

“…7. Instrument items reflect effective teaching practices as developed and refined by researchers Hidlebaugh (1973), Judkins (1987), Weber (1992), Omotani (1992), Wilcox (1995), Wilkerson (1997), and Kayona (1999).…”

“…The intent was to improve teacher compensation and opportunities for professional growth, thereby improving student learning. This movement encouraged a renewed interest in teacher evaluation but was focused more on evaluators, instruments, and models, and less on the evaluatee (Kayona, 1999).…”

“…More than a decade of school reform has resulted in significant changes in teacher evaluation (Kayona, 1999). It is a natural evolution of reform that, as high stakes accountability include students with disabilities, higher accountability for teachers would include special education teachers.…”