School Self-Evaluation Instruments and Cognitive Validity. Do Items Capture What They Intend to?

Autor/inn/en	Faddar, Jerich; Vanhoof, Jan; De Maeyer, Sven
Titel	School Self-Evaluation Instruments and Cognitive Validity. Do Items Capture What They Intend to?
Quelle	In: School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 28 (2017) 4, S.608-628 (21 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Zusatzinformation	ORCID (Faddar, Jerich)
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	0924-3453
DOI	10.1080/09243453.2017.1360363
Schlagwörter	Self Evaluation (Individuals); Questionnaires; Cognitive Tests; Construct Validity; Interviews; Memory; Congruence (Psychology); Cognitive Psychology; Likert Scales; Teacher Surveys; Administrator Surveys; Outcome Measures; Cognitive Processes; Response Style (Tests); Qualitative Research; Elementary School Teachers + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Fragebogen; Kognitiver Fähigkeitstest; Interviewing; Interviewtechnik; Gedächtnis; Congruence; Psychology; Kongruenz; Psychologie; Kognitive Psychologie; Likert-Skala; Cognitive process; Kognitiver Prozess; Antwortverhalten; Qualitative Forschung; Elementary school; Teacher; Teachers; Grundschule; Volksschule; Lehrer; Lehrerin; Lehrende
Abstract	School self-evaluation (SSE) often makes use of questionnaires in order to sketch a picture of the school. How respondents cognitively process questionnaire items determines the validity of SSE results. Still, one readily assumes that respondents interpret and answer items as intended by the instrument developer (referred to as cognitive validity), but it remains unclear whether they do. This study tested an exemplary SSE instrument by focusing on the extent to which SSE results are cognitively valid, and on the extent to which differences in cognitive validity can be attributed to respondents and/or items. Cognitive interviews with 20 participants made respondents' answering processes manifest. Results show that, overall, fewer than 50% of respondents' processes of interpreting and elaborating on items are cognitively valid. Cross-classified multilevel analyses indicate that various hierarchical levels, respondents and items, are significant in explaining differences in cognitive validity, but not for all stages of the answering process. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2020/1/01