Students can identify quality teachers, but can they distinguish between dimensions of quality teaching? A comparative analysis of the structure behind the Tripod Survey

Journal article


Witter, Michael and Rowe, Luke. (2024). Students can identify quality teachers, but can they distinguish between dimensions of quality teaching? A comparative analysis of the structure behind the Tripod Survey. Educational Assessment. 29(4), pp. 251-273. https://doi.org/10.1080/10627197.2024.2414966
AuthorsWitter, Michael and Rowe, Luke
Abstract

Student perception surveys are prominent and pervasive tools for teacher appraisal and feedback across international contexts, buoyed by the strong relationship between higher student ratings of teachers and additional measures of teacher effectiveness. Yet, there is disagreement and conflicting evidence regarding the underlying structure of student perception survey instruments, including whether students distinguish multiple dimensions of teaching or form more general impressions (or unidimensional conceptions) of teaching. This study examined the structure of the Tripod student survey in Australian schools using a competing model analysis of different survey structures and examination of discriminant validity to identify the best model fit. Findings challenge the purported Tripod model structure and raise larger questions regarding elements of teaching that students distinguish via student perception surveys. Implications for the use of and continued research on student perception surveys, including those originating in other countries, are discussed.

Year2024
JournalEducational Assessment
Journal citation29 (4), pp. 251-273
PublisherRoutledge
ISSN1062-7197
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)https://doi.org/10.1080/10627197.2024.2414966
Scopus EID2-s2.0-85207260017
Open accessPublished as ‘gold’ (paid) open access
Publisher's version
License
File Access Level
Open
Output statusPublished
Publication dates
Online17 Oct 2024
Publication process dates
Deposited21 Jan 2025
Permalink -

https://acuresearchbank.acu.edu.au/item/912q9/students-can-identify-quality-teachers-but-can-they-distinguish-between-dimensions-of-quality-teaching-a-comparative-analysis-of-the-structure-behind-the-tripod-survey

Download files


Publisher's version
OA_Witter_2024_Students_can_identify_quality_teachers_but.pdf
License: CC BY-NC-ND 4.0
File access level: Open

  • 0
    total views
  • 0
    total downloads
  • 0
    views this month
  • 0
    downloads this month
These values are for the period from 19th October 2020, when this repository was created.

Export as

Related outputs

High-performing teams : Is collective intelligence the answer?
Rowe, Luke I., Hattie, John and Munro, John. (2024). High-performing teams : Is collective intelligence the answer? PLoS ONE. 19(8), p. Article e0307945. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0307945
Can teacher quality be profiled? A cluster analysis of teachers' beliefs, practices and students' perceptions of effectiveness
Witter, Michael and Hattie, John. (2024). Can teacher quality be profiled? A cluster analysis of teachers' beliefs, practices and students' perceptions of effectiveness. British Educational Research Journal. 50(2), pp. 653-675. https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3938
Coding and computational thinking across the curriculum : A review of educational outcomes
Mills, Kathy Ann, Cope, Jen, Scholes, Laura and Rowe, Luke. (2024). Coding and computational thinking across the curriculum : A review of educational outcomes. Review of Educational Research. pp. 1-38. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543241241327
Research Through the Eyes of Teachers
Rowe, Luke and Hattie, John. (2023). Research Through the Eyes of Teachers. In In Their Own Words: What Scholars and Teachers WantYou to Know About Why and Howto Apply the Science of Learning inYour Academic Setting pp. 44-60 Society for the Teaching of Psychology.
Validating a forced‑choice method for eliciting quality‑of‑reasoning judgments
Marcoci, Alexandru, Stelmach, Margaret E., Rowe, Luke, Barnett, Ashley, Primoratz, Tamar, Kruger, Ariel, Karvetski, Christopher W., Stone, Benjamin, Diamond, Michael L., Saletta, Morgan, van Gelder, Tim, Tetlock, Philip E. and Dennis, Simon. (2023). Validating a forced‑choice method for eliciting quality‑of‑reasoning judgments. Behavior Research Methods. pp. 1-16. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-023-02234-x
What do secondary teachers think about digital games for learning : Stupid fixation or the future of education?
Gutierrez, Amanda, Mills, Kathy, Scholes, Laura, Rowe, Luke and Pink, Elizabeth. (2023). What do secondary teachers think about digital games for learning : Stupid fixation or the future of education? Teaching and Teacher Education. 133, p. Article 104278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2023.104278
Spiritual and Pedagogical Accompaniment (SPA) program 2022
Gutierrez, Amanda and Rowe, Luke. (2023). Spiritual and Pedagogical Accompaniment (SPA) program 2022 Brisbane, Queensland: Australian Catholic University.
Spiritual and Pedagogical Accompaniment (SPA) program (2019-2021)
Gutierrez, Amanda and Rowe, Luke. (2022). Spiritual and Pedagogical Accompaniment (SPA) program (2019-2021) Brisbane, Queensland: Australian Catholic University.
Video gaming and digital competence among elementary school students
Scholes, Laura, Rowe, Luke, Mills, Kathy A., Gutierrez, Amanda and Pink, Elizabeth. (2022). Video gaming and digital competence among elementary school students. Learning, Media and Technology. pp. 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2022.2156537
autopsych : An R Shiny tool for the reproducible Rasch analysis, differential item functioning, equating, and examination of group effects
Courtney, Matthew G.R., Chang, Kevin C.T., Mei, Bing, Meissel, Kane, Rowe, Luke and Issayeva, Laila B.. (2021). autopsych : An R Shiny tool for the reproducible Rasch analysis, differential item functioning, equating, and examination of group effects. PLoS ONE. 16(10), p. e0257682. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0257682
g versus c : comparing individual and collective intelligence across two meta-analyses
Rowe, Luke I., Hattie, John and Hester, Robert. (2021). g versus c : comparing individual and collective intelligence across two meta-analyses. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications. 6(1), p. Article 26. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-021-00285-2
Metacognition and self‑regulated learning
Rowe, Luke and Kang, Sean. (2019). Metacognition and self‑regulated learning Australia: Evidence for Learning.
Open dialogue peer review : A response to Claxton & Lucas
Hattie, John, Clinton, Janet and Rowe, Luke. (2016). Open dialogue peer review : A response to Claxton & Lucas. Psychology of Education Review. 40(1), pp. 30-37. https://doi.org/10.53841/bpsper.2016.40.1.30