MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2057315286 · doi:10.1177/0042085910377442

The Multicultural Teaching Competency Scale: Development and Initial Validation

2010· article· en· W2057315286 on OpenAlexaff
Lisa B. Spanierman, Euna Oh, P. Paul Heppner, Helen A. Neville, Michael Mobley, Caroline Vaile Wright, Frank R. Dillon, Rachel L. Navarro

Bibliographic record

VenueUrban Education · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTeacher Education and Leadership Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMulticulturalismExploratory factor analysisConfirmatory factor analysisPsychologyMulticultural educationScale (ratio)Cultural competenceInternal consistencyConsistency (knowledge bases)Social psychologyMathematics educationPedagogyPsychometricsStructural equation modelingDevelopmental psychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article reports on the development and initial validation of the multidimensional Multicultural Teaching Competency Scale (MTCS). Data from 506 pre- and in-service teachers were collected in three interrelated studies. Exploratory factor analysis results suggested a 16-item, two-factor solution: (a) multicultural teaching skill and (b) multicultural teaching knowledge. Confirmatory factor analysis suggested that the two-factor model was a good fit of the data and superior to competing models. The MTCS demonstrated adequate internal consistency and was related in meaningful ways to measures of racism awareness and multicultural teaching attitudes. Participant responses were not associated with social desirability. Implications are discussed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.126

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.059
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.323 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations154
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUrban EducationSame topicTeacher Education and Leadership StudiesFrench-language works237,207