Teacher-Student Performance Criteria During Online Classes due to COVID-19: Self-Report by Postgraduate Students in Education

Abstract

<p style="text-align: justify;">During didactic interactions, teachers and students employ competencies and skills that correspond functionally to one another, and several models propose to typify didactic performances in higher education. For this study, we chose the didactic performance interbehavioral model as the substantive theory to identify six pairs of didactic performance criteria through self-evaluations from graduate students. These included: Competency exploration–precurrent learning behaviors, Criteria explicitness–Criteria identification, Illustration–Participation, Practice supervision–Relevant practice, Feedback–Improvement, and Evaluation–Application.309 Peruvian students from an in-person postgraduate course in Education Sciences filled out two scales (via Google Forms) to assess teacher-student performance criteria during online classes. Convergent and divergent validity were obtained separately for six teacher/student performance constructs through a confirmatory analysis using LISREL 8. Moreover, differences according to sex were only significant for the Illustration teacher criterion (favoring men) and the Application student criterion (favoring women). Students rated Explicitness of criteria and Illustration as the teacher performance criteria most frequently seen during online classes. On the other hand, Criteria identification ranked the highest in terms of the students’ performance criteria, followed by Feedback–Improvement. Another conclusion was that the didactic performance interbehavioral model could be empirically supported by the two self-assessment questionnaires, which yielded good convergent and divergent validity of constructs.</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].…”

“…Likewise, good goodness-of-fit has been found in predictive structural regression models with structural equation modeling. Table 1 shows the six pairs of didactic performance criteria used in this study, based on previous validations [7,29,41], from the initial proposals of the interbehavioral model of didactic performance [39,40]. To determine the level of covariation and divergence and convergence between constructs of teacher didactic performance and student didactic performance in virtual classes based on the self-reported assessment of students of the Professional School of Biology of a public university in Peru, in the context of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, in the August-November period (Semester 2020-I).…”

“…To identify the criteria (variables) of the didactic performance of the teacher in didactic interactions in classes and practices in the virtual modality, perceived by students of biological sciences of a public university in Peru, the scale of Teaching Performance of the Psychology Professor was adapted. This scale has been validated for the evaluation of teaching performance in undergraduate psychology professors in the face-to-face modality [41] and has been extended and validated for the evaluation of the didactic performance of graduate professors in educational sciences in the virtual modality that was adopted due to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic [29]. This instrument consists of 24 items (Appendix A), four items for each of the six criteria of teacher performance, according to the interbehavioral model of didactic performance and the substantive theory from which they were derived [35][36][37][38][39][40].…”

“…Sustainability 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW public university in Peru, the scale of Teaching Performance of the Psychology Pro was adapted. This scale has been validated for the evaluation of teaching performa undergraduate psychology professors in the face-to-face modality [41] and has be tended and validated for the evaluation of the didactic performance of graduate p sors in educational sciences in the virtual modality that was adopted due to the CoV-2 pandemic [29]. This instrument consists of 24 items (Appendix A), four ite each of the six criteria of teacher performance, according to the interbehavioral mo didactic performance and the substantive theory from which they were derived [3 Each student response was rated on a Likert scale, 0 = never, 1 = sometimes, 2 = a always, and 3 = always.…”