A Psychometric Evaluation of Two Teaching Effectiveness Scales

Abstract

The call for teaching accountability in higher education initiated teaching effectiveness research and its scales development. Attention in many institutions of higher learning has been diverted recently to the improvement of teaching performance as another way besides academic research to promote the higher institutions. The diversity of attention is a response to external calls for accountability in teaching as a result of the under-estimation of the significance of the teaching process compared to research activities. As research on teaching effectiveness has increased, so has the number of different measures of teaching effectiveness. Hence, in this article, the researchers examined the psychometric properties of two teaching effectiveness scales, namely the Marsh Student Evaluation of Educational Quality (1987) and Mahfooz Ansari and Mustafa Achoui Ansari Teaching Feedback Survey (2000) in terms of their factorial and construct validity. A total of 1504 3 rd and 4 th year and postgraduate students were selected from four renowned Malaysian public Universities, namely USIM, UM, UPM and IIUM. The study found that although the two scales were constructed to assess teaching effectiveness in higher institutions, the Marsh scale was extensively used in the literature and more comprehensive in relation to the numbers of factors. The study found that although there is room for improvement for both scales, the Marsh's scale is psychometrically more sound, and theoretically more comprehensive than Ansari and Ansari's scale.

The Comparative Experimental Study of the Teaching Effect between Jigsaw Teaching Method and Traditional Teaching One in Medical Literature Retrieval Course

“…Questionnaires: Based on Marsh Student Evaluation of Educational Quality (SEEQ) [4] [5] and Mahfooz Ansari and Mustafa Achoui Ansari Teaching Feedback Survey [6], Questionnaire on the implementation effect of teaching mode based on Jigsaw teaching method/traditional teaching method was compiled to compare the differences in learning ability, learning effect and expression ability between the two teaching methods. The answer options of the questionnaire were all set quantitatively according to the 5-level equidistant grading standard in Likert scale.…”

Cuestionario de clasificación de etapas de cambio y cesación de consumo de cigarrillo/tabaco CCET

“…A partir de los resultados obtenidos del análisis confirmatorio con el programa AMOS® se encontró que el índice CMIN/DF (Minimum Discrepancy Funtion Divided by its Degrees of Freedom) El ajuste debía ser inferior a 5.0. (Ibrahim, 2012;Marsh y Hocevar, 1985). En este caso el valor concordó con lo esperado por un ajuste razonable (Marsh y Hocevar, 1985;Moss et ál., 2015).…”

Predictors of Online Learning Readiness and Their Consequences on Learning Engagement and Perceived Teaching Quality during Covid19

“…The scale consists of 30 items with four distinctive factors; delivery of information, meaningful interaction, feedback and fair treatment and Islamic orientation. The scale has been psychometrically tested via confirmatory factor analysis (Ibrahim, 2012), and the analysis suggested high internal consistencies ranging between .81 to .92. Furthermore, the CFA proved four distinctive factors for the scale.…”