Psychometric evaluation of the Danish language version of the field practice experiences questionnaire for students in teacher education (FPE-DK) using item analysis according to the Rasch model.
The aim of the study was to conduct a first validation of three field practice experience scales intended to measure students' opportunities to learn through observation of other teachers, own practice and feedback on own practice of 12 key teaching activities while in field practice placement...
Guardado en:
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Formato: | article |
| Lenguaje: | EN |
| Publicado: |
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
2021
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://doaj.org/article/20369e1c369145f5b8527e42f9bd2267 |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| Sumario: | The aim of the study was to conduct a first validation of three field practice experience scales intended to measure students' opportunities to learn through observation of other teachers, own practice and feedback on own practice of 12 key teaching activities while in field practice placement as part of teacher education programs. The scales were translated and adapted from the elementary teaching candidate survey from the Development of Ambitious Instruction project. Items were adapted to refer to the teaching subject students were training in, and the response scale was modified. A four-step translation-back-translation strategy was used, and subsequently the Danish and a Norwegian and Icelandic translations were mutually adjusted for meaning to facilitate later cross-Nordic studies. Participants were 345 Danish students in the teacher education program from one university college, who had been in at least one field practice placement. Data were collected using a targeted online survey during one month immediately following field placement. Data was analysed using the Rasch model. Each of the three field experience scales fitted a Rasch model, with no evidence against overall homogeneity of scores for low versus high scoring students, local dependence between items, or DIF in relation to level of field practice, campus, type of teacher education program, gender or age. Reliability of each scale was excellent for most subgroups, while the targeting of the scales to the study sample was not very good, as there were too few teaching activities occurring rarely during field practice (i.e. too few difficult items). For all three scales there were significant differences in mean scores dependent on level of field practice placement. Thus, while the scales should be expanded to get better coverage of students' opportunities to learn in relation to all the core teaching activities present in that are to be trained in the field practice placement, the very good psychometric properties of the three scales, shows promise for future research. |
|---|