140 likes | 153 Views
The EQUIP protocol is a reliable and valid measure of the quality of inquiry-based instructional practice. It assesses factors such as instruction, discourse, assessment, and curriculum, providing valuable insights for practitioners, PD facilitators, and in-service preparation.
E N D
Electronic Quality of Inquiry Protocol (EQUIP): Assessing the Quality of Inquiry-Based Instructional Practice ASTE 2009 Jeff C. Marshall
Status of Inquiry-Based Instruction • Teachers know it is important • Some try • However, many find it difficult to implement • PD facilitators need formative guide • Teachers need way to self-monitor performance
Need • The Call: Inquiry should be a central tenet of sound instructional practice (AAAS, 1993, 1998; Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, 2000; Llewellyn, 2002; NCTM, 1991, 2000; NRC, 1996, 2000). • Teacher Perceptions: Teachers believe that they are spending 38.7% of their time on inquiry-based instruction (Marshall, Horton, Igo, and Switzer, In Press). • Teacher Ideals: Teachers see that they should ideally be devoting about 57.3% of their time leading inquiry based instruction (Marshall, Horton, Igo, and Switzer, In Press). • Overall Quality: The perception is high yet the quality is low—inquiry is often mistaken for activities (Moscovici & Holdlund-Nelson, 1998).
Some Other Protocols • Inside the Classroom Observational Protocol (Horizon Research, 2002) • Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol, R-TOP (Sawada et al., 2000) • Science Management Observation Protocol, SMOP, (Sampson, 2004) • Science Teacher Inquiry Protocol, STIR (Beerer & Bodzin, 2003)
Development of EQUIP Protocol • Began with variation of R-TOP and Inside the Classroom • Field Tested • Moved away from Likert Scale to Descriptive Rubric • Tested Reliability (Inter-rater and Item) • Field Tested • Conducted Confirmatory Factor Analysis • Field Testing Current Version
Reliability and Validity • Face Validity—seven member team • Internal Consistency—n = 102 (-value ranged from .880-.889 before CFA to .858-.912 after) • Inter-rater reliability—16 paired observations (Cohen’sscores ranged from .55-.61) • Content Validity (see paper) • Construct Validity—CFA run (2//df 2 indicates reasonable fit (Kline, 2005), RMSEA of .1 is on the threshold of reasonable fit (Browne & Cudeck, 1993), SRMR < .1 is considered favorable (Kline, 2005), and the computerized fit index, CFI, of > .90 is considered a good fit (Hu & Bentler, 1999))
Confirmatory Factor Analysis • Began with 3 factors (instruction, curriculum, & ecology) with 26 total indicators • CFA showed 4 factors (19 total indicators) loaded better (instruction, discourse, assessment, & curriculum)
Sample of Instructional Factors Associated with Inquiry-Based Instruction
Sample of Discourse Factors Associated with Inquiry-Based Instruction
Sample of Assessment Factors Associated with Inquiry-Based Instruction
Sample of Curriculum Factors Associated with Inquiry-Based Instruction
EQUIP Summary • Reliable and valid measure • Valuable measure of inquiry-based instruction • Instruction • Discourse • Assessment • Curriculum • Useful for practitioners, PD facilitators, and in-service preparation
More Information • Jeff C. Marshall • Email: marsha9@clemson.edu • Website: www.clemson.edu/iim