Comparing Perceptions of Classroom Interactions Across Student and Administration Reports Shantel Gamble1, Manuela Jimenez2, André Durham3, Jason Downer4, PhD Hampton University1, University of Virginia2, Curry School of Education  

Children spend the majority of their time in school with their teachers (Raudenbush & Sadoff, 2008). In turn, these social and relational interactions with their teachers are important for students’ development. Teacher-student interactions have been shown to have positive and negative influences on students’ achievement and behavioral/emotional health (Pianta & Allen, in press).

Student evaluations have been utilized in educational institutions for over 50 years in order to provide feedback to faculty so that they may improve their teaching (Huemer, 1998). Despite the fact that they have shown to be based on personal biases (Huemer, 1998; Feldman, 2007; Kunter & Bauner, 2006; McPherson, 2006), studies have found that student evaluations represent valid judgments of the students’ educational experiences (Cashin, 1995; Kelly & Ponton, 2007; Schaub-de Jong, Schönrock-Adema).

Principal ratings can be good predictors for identifying high and low performing teachers, but they may be less capable of honestly assessing teacher effectiveness due to social or political pressures as well as favoritism (Harris & Sass, 2009; Jacob & Lefgren, 2006). Students’ ratings of their teachers have been found to be the best predictor of students’ educational experience when compared to colleague, principal and teacher self-ratings (Huemer, 1998; Wilkerson et al. 2000). However, there has been skepticism about the ability of younger children to complete these reports reliably (Wooley, Bowen & Bowen, 2004), and there continue to be questions about how well ratings from different people’s perspectives align.

The central purpose of this study is therefore to examine the differences between student and administrative reports on teacher-student interactions in the classroom.

Research Questions: • How are principal and student ratings of student-teacher interactions related to one another? • Are students’ perceptions of their interactions with teachers linked to particular student characteristics?

Participants

This study involves secondary analysis from surveys of nine school administrators and 125 fourth and fifth graders about 14 teachers from a rural-suburban school district in the southeastern US.

Students: 82.4 % Caucasian, 13.6% African American; 96.8% Native English speakers; 40.8% female (4 students did not respond) Teachers: 13 Caucasian, 1 Latino; 3 males; Mean years of teaching experience: 12. Informants: 8 Caucasian; 1 male; Mean years of being an administrator: 12.

Procedure

Student data were gathered in Spring 2010. Each classroom had a staff member administer surveys aloud. Each school had 3 informants complete a survey for each of the participating teachers in their school.

Background

Methodology

Results Discussion

•References available upon request. Email: sgamble123@aol.com

Specification of Measures

School Administrator, Teacher, and Classroom Demographics: • Administrators completed a questionnaire which assessed their professional demographics such as years experience as an administrator and education level. • Teachers completed a questionnaire which assessed classroom characteristics such as the number of students, racial/ethnicity make up, and languages spoken by staff and students. The questionnaire also assessed teacher characteristics such as years of experience in a classroom, education level, and credentials.

Quality of Teacher-Student Interactions The quality of teacher-child interactions was assessed in each classroom using the CLASS-Informant and -Student Report surveys. These surveys were developed to be used as a complement to the well-validated observational tool, the Classroom Assessment Scoring System (CLASS: Pianta, LaParo, & Hamre, 2008). It is comprised of three domains of teacher-child interactions in upper elementary classrooms – Emotional Support, Classroom Organization, and Instructional Support. Items for each survey were constructed To represent these three domains and twelve dimensions from the perspective of both the administrator and the students. CLASS-Student Report: 5-point Likert scale from ‘Almost Never’ to ‘Almost Always’ Alphas ranged from .174-.846 for the 12 dimensions “My teacher encourages me to do my best.” “My teacher makes me feel stupid when I ask questions.” “My teacher explains it in a new way if I say that I don’t understand something.” CLASS-Informant Report: 5-point Likert scale from ‘Almost Never’ to ‘Almost Always’ Alphas ranged from .843-.943 for the 12 dimensions “The students are sarcastic and disrespectful.” “ The teacher works one-on-one with students who are having a difficult time.” “ The majority of the students participate in content focused discussion.”

•  Posi%ve Climate • Nega%ve Climate •  Teacher Sensi%vity • Regard for Student Perspec%ves 

• Behavioral Management •  Produc%vely •  Instruc%onal Learning Format 

•  Content Understanding • Analysis and Problem Solving • Quality of Feedback •  Instruc%onal Dialogue 

•  Student Engagement 

3.68 3.8 

3.21 

3.95 

3.51 

3.94 3.73 

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

CU APS QF ID

Rat

ings

(mea

n)

CLASS Dimensions

Instructional Support

Students Principals

1)  According to T-Tests, principals were found to rate teachers significantly higher than students in two of four domains, Emotional Support and Instructional Support. Within these domains, principals rated teachers higher than students in dimensions such as, Respect for Student Perspectives and Instructional Dialogue. There were no significant differences between student and principal ratings within Classroom Organization and Student Outcome.

2)  T-Test suggests that there were no significant differences amongst students’ perceptions of their interactions with teachers based on gender, race or IEP status.

Significant at the 0.05 level.

In this study, results suggest that students’ characteristics, such as gender, race and IEP status, are not related to their perceptions of classroom interactions with teachers. This may reflect the fact that students are perceiving their experiences with their teachers similarly, regardless of personal characteristics. In addition, principals rated teachers higher than students within Emotional Support and Instructional Support. Specifically, principals consistently rated teachers as being more flexible, placing a greater value on autonomy, being more facilitative of students’ understanding of the content through the use of dialogue for Instructional Support than students did. Interestingly, these elements of teacher-student interactions share the common theme of encouraging student participation. Findings suggest that students may be more critical observers of classroom interactions than principals when these interactions are directly relevant to how much teachers seem to value student contributions.

There were some limitations within the study such as sample size, and its demographic makeup. There was an absence of diversity within the sample amongst teachers, students and administrators. Future studies should collect data from a variety of schools, for example, urban school districts.  

4.13 

4.5 

4.08 

3.34 

4.22 

4.65 

4.1 

3.77 

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

PC NC TS RSP

Rat

ings

(mea

ns)

CLASS Dimensions

Emotional Support

Students Principals