A Study of Perceptions Held Toward Teacher Evaluation Policies and Practices by Teachers and Their Supervisors in Adventist Schools in Canada
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Problem. Most school administrators and teachers deem teacher evaluation systems to be extremely stressful, of little or no value, and a barrier to high staff morale. The purpose of this study was to investigate the current teacher evaluation policies and practices and the perceptions held toward these policies and practices by selected elementary and secondary' teachers and their supervisors in the Adventist schools in Canada. Method. The population of this study consisted of selected elementary and secondary teachers and their supervisors in the Adventist schools in Canada. Two hundred and twenty-five teachers and 48 supervisors were surveyed. The survey instrument used in the study was adapted from the one used by Hauge (1981). The instrument was designed to reflect the teachers' evaluation policies and practices as perceived by elementary and secondary teachers and their supervisors. The survey instrument and the cover letters were sent to the supervisors and the teachers by first-class mail. The 47 hypotheses were tested at the .05 level o f significance using /-tests and chi-square to determine whether a significant difference existed between variables by comparing the group means and whether or not an association existed between variables by calculating discrepancies between observed and expected cell frequencies, respectively. Results. The findings of this research study generally confirm that: 1. The supervisors thought they had a better knowledge of their teachers’ teaching capabilities than their teachers thought they had. 2. Both supervisors and teachers perceived the evaluation process to be a useful one. 3. Both teachers and supervisors viewed the improvement of teaching performance as the main purpose of performance evaluation. 4. While supervisors and teachers agreed in their perception concerning the implementation of four basic components of the evaluation process, they disagreed on another four. The general picture, however, indicates that supervisors tended to view themselves as implementing the basic components of the evaluation process to a greater extent than teachers viewed them as doing. 5. Most supervisors reported having had formal training in performance evaluation before and after assuming the supervisory role. Supervisors reported that they felt competent and at ease in the evaluator's role, and teachers concurred. 6. Both teachers and supervisors felt there was a need for more administrative assistance for supervisors so that they could have the time to conduct more frequent and more effective evaluations. They also felt that the evaluation process ought to include greater teacher involvement. Conclusion. From this study it can be concluded that most teachers and supervisors in Adventist schools in Canada deemed teacher evaluation policies and practices to be helpful. As well it was not as stressful, nor of little value as reported in the literature and pertinent research studies.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,006 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,006 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».