Observational Record and Self-Report of Teacher-Student Performance in High School Lessons

Abstract

<p style="text-align: justify;">There are different strategies to analyze teacher and student performance when they interact with each other in class. The most used strategies are direct observation and verbal reports. Even though what is observed or reported depends on theoretical frameworks regarding didactic interactions, these must be related to teacher functions such as supervision, providing feedback, and evaluation of student performance. In this study, instruments for observational recording and verbal reports were developed and validated considering teacher functions and their student performance counterparts to compare the degree of correspondence or divergence between data gathered from both strategies. 135 students enrolled in a science class and their teachers participated. The class was taught in a public high school located in center/south Mexico. Classes were videotaped and the corresponding observational records were analyzed. Two months later, verbal reports were administered to students and teachers. Coincidences and differences that were found revealed that observer-observe interaction is conditioned by social norms. These results were interpreted considering the notion of silence as a communicative element.</p>

Self-Reporting of Teacher–Student Performance in Virtual Class Interactions in Biological Sciences during the SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 Pandemic

“…Self-reports derived from this model of didactic performance have achieved stability and construct validity with restricted models of both teacher and student, and of various disciplines, contexts and educational levels [7,29,41]. Likewise, good goodness-of-fit has been found in predictive structural regression models with structural equation modeling.…”

“…For example, it has been reported that the effect of the transfer of digital competencies (information acquisition, communication, self-assessment, access to information, the application of digital security and problem solving), depends on the types of interaction with respect to the level or degree of studies and age groups [27]. On the other hand, discrepancies have been reported between the teacher's perception and the university student's perception of teacher performance and teaching quality [28,29], which are similar in the face-to-face context [7]. Additionally, a digital divide between faculty and students, low digital literacy, and inequality of access and connectivity have been reported [17,30].…”

“…Based on the principles of the interbehavioral psychology of J.R. Kantor [35,36], an interbehavioral model of didactic performance has been proposed for the study of interactions during classes or practices in science teaching and learning [9,39,40]. The categories for the student, which should functionally correspond with the categories for the teacher, were outlined theoretically [8] and concretized and validated on the basis of observational records of real situations of didactic interaction [7].…”

“…Educational processes, and in particular the experiences of didactic teacher-student interactions, also help people to acquire knowledge, skills, values and behaviors related to sustainable development in their daily life and work. These competencies and experiences, of both teachers and students, can be facilitated through various psychological and pedagogical approaches and didactic interaction practices, in order to develop learning in various disciplines [6][7][8][9]. Some authors have pointed out that competency-centered teaching models at universities are based on didactic principles of professional direction, interdisciplinarity, grounding and informatization [1].…”

“…The teacher-student interaction is essential for learning. During these interactions the teacher directs, manages and facilitates the learning of their students through different performances [6,7]. The students' performances during the interactive learning processes, and after them, functionally correspond to the teacher's performances in this didactic interaction [8,9].…”