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.
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.