Table of contents for Thirteen strategies to measure college teaching : a consumer's guide to rating scale construction, assessment, and decision making for faculty, administrators, and clinicians / Ronald A. Berk.

Bibliographic record and links to related information available from the Library of Congress catalog.

Note: Contents data are machine generated based on pre-publication provided by the publisher. Contents may have variations from the printed book or be incomplete or contain other coding.


Counter
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER
1. TOP 13 SOURCES OF EVIDENCE OF TEACHING EFFECTIVENESS
 A Few Ground Rules
Teaching Effectiveness: Defining the Construct 
		National Standards
		Beyond Student Ratings
		A Unified Conceptualization
13 Sources of Evidence
		Student Ratings
		Peer Ratings
		Self-Evaluation
		External Expert Ratings
		Videos
		Student Interviews
		Exit and Alumni Ratings
		Employer Ratings
		Administrator Ratings
		Teaching Scholarship
		Teaching Awards
		Learning Outcome Measures
		Teaching Portfolio
		BONUS: 360° Multi-Source Assessment
Berk's Top Picks 
 		Formative Decisions 
		Summative Decisions
		Program Decisions 
Decision Time
2. CREATING THE RATING SCALE STRUCTURE 
Overview of Scale Construction Process 
Specifying the "Purpose" of the Scale
Delimiting "What" Is to Be Measured
Focus Groups 
Interviews 
Research Evidence
Determining "How" to Measure the "What"
Existing Scales
Item Banks
Commercially Published Scales
Universe of Items
Structure of Rating Scale Items
 	Structured Items
		Unstructured Items
3. GENERATING THE STATEMENTS
Preliminary Decisions
Domain Specifications
Number of Statements
Rules for Writing Statements 
1. The statement should be clear and direct.
2. The statement should be brief and concise. 
3. The statement should contain only one complete behavior, thought, concept.
4. The statement should be a simple sentence. 
5. The statement should be at the appropriate reading level. 
6. The statement should be grammatically correct. 
7. The statement should be worded strongly.
8. The statement should be congruent with the behavior it is intended to measure.
9. The statement should accurately measure a positive or negative behavior.
10. The statement should be applicable to all respondents.
11. The respondents should be in the best position to respond to the statement.
12. The statement should be interpretable in only one way.
13. The statement should NOT contain a double negative.
14. The statement should NOT contain universal or absolute terms.
15. The statement should NOT contain nonabsolute, warm and fuzzy terms.
16. The statement should NOT contain value-laden or inflammatory words.
17. The statement should NOT contain words, phrases, or abbreviations that would be unfamiliar to all respondents.
18. The statement should NOT tap a behavior appearing in any other statement.
19. The statement should NOT be factual or capable of being interpreted as factual. 
20. The statement should NOT be endorsed or given one answer by almost all respondents or by almost none.
4. SELECTING THE ANCHORS 
 Types of Anchors
	Intensity Anchors 
	Evaluation Anchors
	Frequency Anchors
 Quantity Anchors
	Comparison Anchors	 	
Rules for Selecting Anchors
1. The anchors should be consistent with the purpose of the rating scale.
2. The anchors should match the statements, phrases, or word topics.
3. The anchors should be logically appropriate with each statement.
4. The anchors should be grammatically consistent with each statement.
5. The anchors should provide the most accurate and concrete responses possible.
6. The anchors should elicit a range of responses.
7. The anchors on bipolar scales should be balanced, not biased.
8. The anchors on unipolar scales should be graduated appropriately.
5. REFINING THE ITEM STRUCTURE
Preparing for Structural Changes
Issues in Scale Construction
1. What rating scale format is best?
2. How many anchor points should be on the scale?
3. Should there be a designated midpoint position, such as "neutral," "uncertain," or "undecided," on the scale?
4. How many anchors should be specified on the scale?
5. Should numbers be placed on the anchor scale?
 
6. Should a NOT APPLICABLE (NA) or NOT OBSERVED (NO) option be
 provided?
7. How can response set biases be minimized?
6. ASSEMBLING THE SCALE FOR ADMINISTRATION
Assembling the Scale 
	Identification Information
	Purpose 
	Directions
	Structured Items
	Unstructured Items
Scale Administration
Paper-Based Administration
Online Administration
Comparability of Paper-Based and Online Ratings
Conclusions
7. FIELD TESTING AND ITEM ANALYSES
 Preparing the Draft Scale for a Test Spin
 Field Test Procedures
 Mini-Field Test
 Monster-Field Test
 Item Analyses
 Stage 1: Item Descriptive Statistics
 Stage 2: Interitem and Item-Scale Correlations
 Stage 3: Factor Analysis
8. COLLECTING EVIDENCE OF VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY 
Validity Evidence
	Evidence Based on Job Content Domain 
	Evidence Based on Response Processes
	Evidence Based on Internal Scale Structure 
	Evidence Related to Other Measures of Teaching Effectiveness
	Evidence Based on the Consequences of Ratings 
 Reliability Evidence
	Classical Reliability Theory
	Summated Rating Scale Theory
	Methods of Estimating Reliability
Epilogue
9. REPORTING AND INTERPRETING SCALE RESULTS
Generic Levels of Score Reporting
Item Anchor
	Item
	Subscale 
Total Scale
	Department/Program Norms
	Subject Matter/Program Level State, Regional, and National Norms
Criterion-Referenced vs. Norm-Referenced Interpretations
	Score Range
	Criterion-Referenced Interpretations 
	Norm-Referenced Interpretations 
Formative, Summative, and Program Decisions
	Formative Decisions 
	Summative Decisions
	Program Decisions
Conclusions 
REFERENCES
APPENDICES 	 
 	 A. Sample Rating Scales
 	 B. Sample 360° Assessment Rating Scales
 C. Sample Reporting Formats
 D. Commercially Published Student Rating Scale Systems

Library of Congress Subject Headings for this publication:

College teachers -- Rating of.
Teacher effectiveness.