Search

Core competencies essential for effective teaching were identified via a literature review and a review of standards for teacher education, and vetted by state groups with interests in teacher education. Survey items based on these competencies asked teacher candidates, graduates, and teacher education program faculty how well the program prepared teachers. The 41 items common to surveys of the three groups were submitted to Rasch analysis to determine dimensionality, scale use, targeting, reliability, and, of particular interest, invariance. Results suggested two dimensions were captured by the 41 items, entitled "knowledge, skills and behavior in promoting student achievement," and "resource use, academic language, and numeracy," with reliability of person separation of 0.94 and 0.73, respectively. Use of the 0-4 response scale was appropriate for both dimensions. Items were relatively easy to agree with for both scales, with person means of 1.24 and 0.57. Differential item functioning was found for respondent group and also for extent of program involvement but not for sex or for route to certification. The paper provides a discussion of implications of results for program evaluation.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to examine scale dimensionality, reliability, invariance, targeting, continuity, cutoff scores, and diagnostic use of the Geriatric Depression Scale-Short Form (GDS-SF) over time with a sample of 177 English-speaking U.S. elders. Design and Methods: An item response theory, Rasch analysis, was conducted with data from a larger study that implemented 3 interventions and collected data at 3 time points (prior to intervention, after intervention, and a year following the end of intervention). Results: A unidimensional structure was found in this study to adequately fit the data. There appears to be significant differential item functioning, with up to one third of the items indicating that the items have different meanings for different groups of participants. As a screening tool, the GDS-SF is more likely to discriminate between older adults who have a "moderate" level of depression than between those with mild depression and no diagnosed depression. Implications: We would recommend that the GDS-SF not be used as the sole method of screening for depression but incorporated into other clinical knowledge related to the geriatric patient in question, given that not all items are equally functional. The GDS-SF may be less effective as a screening tool but could be better used to detect a change in moderate levels of depression. Clinicians may also benefit by identifying person responses that misfit. If an individual provides responses that are atypical, the person might be referred to provide a more in-depth assessment of mental health status.

Purpose: Measures are lacking that address the challenges that people think they face in their roles as elderly care receivers. However, the development of a sense of efficacy in this role by mentally competent care receivers is critical to successful partnerships between caregivers and care receivers. The purpose of this article is to report the development and psychometric analysis of the Care-Receiver Efficacy Scale (CRES). Design and Methods: Content validity, internal consistency reliability, factor structure, and convergent validity were assessed through a pilot study, expert review, and field administration with 177 participants. Results: Results suggest that the CRES comprises five subscales, with strong reliability evidenced for three subscales but marginal reliability for the remaining two. Strong support was found for content validity from expert review and moderate support from the relationship between empirical and expert judgment of item location. Support for validity also was found from correlation with the Geriatric Depression Scale-Short Form and the Philadelphia Geriatric Center Morale Scale. Implications: The CRES may be useful as an outcome measure for psycho-socio-behavioral interventions aimed at increasing the capacity of care receivers to direct and improve their own care. Future measure revision and validation are important to optimize its utility.

Achievement test reliability and validity as a function of ability were determined for multiple sections of a large undergraduate French class. Results did not support previous arguments that decreasing the number of options results in a more efficient test for high-level examinees, but less efficient for low-level examinees. (Author/GK)

Changes in health behaviors as well as changes in self-concept are often the primary goals of health education. Both the Piers-Harris and the Parcel-Meyer Health Locus of Control (HLC) scales are reliable measures of the affective impact of a health education program. (CJ)

Reliabilities and concurrent validities of teacher-made multiple-choice and true-false tests were compared. No significant differences were found even when multiple-choice reliability was adjusted to equate testing time. (Author/MH)

In a study involving 50 undergraduate and graduate education students the Attitudes Toward Mainstreaming Scale was found to have a large first factor with adequate reliability. There was a low correlation between knowledge and ATMS scores, although knowledge was more strongly related to classroom acceptance of exceptional students. (CL)

This study explored optimization of item-attribute matrices with the linear logistic test model (Fischer, 1973), with optimal models explaining more variance in item difficulty due to identified item attributes. Data were 8th-grade mathematics test item responses of two TIMSS 2007 booklets. The study investigated three categories of attributes (content, cognitive process, and comprehensive cognitive process) at two grain levels (larger, smaller) and also compared results with random attribute matrices. The proposed attributes accounted for most of the variance in item difficulty for two assessment booklets (81% and 65%). The variance explained by the content attributes was very small (13% - 31%), less than variance explained by the comprehensive cognitive process attributes which explained much more variance than the content and cognitive process attributes. The variances explained by the grain level were similar to each other. However, the attributes did not predict the item difficulties of two assessment booklets equally. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]