What teachers think about what they can do with data: Development and validation of the data driven decision-making efficacy and anxiety inventory

Contemporary Educational Psychology

Volumn 38, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 87-98

  Dunn, Karee E ^a   Airola, Denise T ^a   Lo, Wen Juo ^a   Garrison, Mickey ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS   (United States)

^b Oregon Department of Forestry   (United States)

Author keywords

Data driven decision making; Efficacy; Measure construction

Indexed keywords

EID: 84875274954     PISSN: 0361476X     EISSN: 10902384     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2012.11.002     Document Type: Article

References (95)

1. Airola D.T., Dunn K.E. Oregon DATA project final evaluation report 2011, Next Level Evaluation, Inc., Fayetteville, AR, .
2. Airola, D., Dunn, K. E., & Garrison, M. (2011a). 3D-ME: The validation of the Data Driven Decision-Making Efficacy questionnaire. Posterpresented at the American Psychological Association Convention; Washington D.C.
3. Airola, D., Mulvenon, S., Dunn, K., & Mickey Garrison. (2011b). The road less traveled: Using data-driven decision making in your SLDS Project. Paper presented at the National Center for Education Sciences Summer Data Conference; Washington D.C.
4. Anderson J.C., Gerbing D.W. Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin 1988, 103:411-423.
5. Aydin Y.C., Uzuntiryaki E., Demirdogen B. Interplay of motivational and cognitive strategies in predicting self-efficacy and anxiety. Educational Psychology 2011, 31(1):55-66.
6. Bandura A. Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review 1977, 84:191-215.
7. Bandura A. Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory 1986, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
8. Bandura A. Self-efficacy conception of anxiety. Anxiety Research 1988, 1:77-98.
9. Bandura A. Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational Psychologist 1993, 28(2):117-148.
10. Bandura A. Self-efficacy. Encyclopedia of Human Behavior 1994, 4:71-81.
11. Bandura A. Self-efficacy: The exercise of control 1997, W.H. Freeman and Company, New York.
12. Bandura A., Caprara G.V., Barbaranelli C., Gerbino M., Pastorelli C. Role of affective self-regulatory efficacy in diverse spheres of psychosocial functioning. Child Development 2003, 74(3):769-782.
13. Bandura A., Schunk D.H. Cultivating competence, self-efficacy, and intrinsic interest through proximal self-motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1981, 41:586-598.
14. Barbeite F.G., Weiss E.M. Computer self-efficacy and anxiety scales for an Internet sample: Testing measurement equivalence of existing measures and development of new scales. Computers in Human Behavior 2004, 20:1-15.
15. Bentler P.M., Bonett D.G. Significance tests and goodness-of-fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin 1980, 88:588-606.
16. Bernhardt V.L. Data use: Data-driven decision making takes a big-picture view of the needs of teachers and students. Journal of Staff Development 2009, 30(1):24-27.
17. Bettesworth L.R., Alonzo J., Duesbery L. Swimming in the depths: Educators' ongoing effective use of data to guide decision making. Handbook on data-based decision making in education 2008, 286-303. Routledge, New York. T.J. Kowalski, T.J. Lasley (Eds.).
18. Bruce C.D., Esmonde I., Ross J., Dookie L., Beatty R. The effects of sustained classroom-embedded teacher professional learning on teacher efficacy and related student achievement. Teaching and Teacher Education 2010, 26(8):1598-1608.
19. Bruning R., Schraw G., Ronning R. Cognitive psychology and instruction 1999, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
20. Carlson D., Borman G., Robinson M. A multistate district-level cluster randomized trial of the impact of data-driven reform on reading and mathematics achievement. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 2011, 33(3):378-398.
21. Choppin, J. (2002, April). Data use in practice: Examples from the school level. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
22. Chrispeels J.H. Purposeful restructuring: Creating a climate of learning and achievement in elementary schools 1992, Falmer Press, London.
23. Comrey A.L., Lee H.B. A first course in factor analysis 1992, Academic Press, New York, NY.
24. Costello, A. B., & Osborne, J. W. (2005, July). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation, 10(7), 173-178. http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=10&n=7.
25. Cousins, B., & Walker, C. (2000). Predictors of educators' valuing of systematic inquiry in schools. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, Special Edition, 25-52.
26. Czerniak, C. M. (1990, April). A study of self-efficacy, anxiety, and science knowledge in preservice elementary teachers. In Paper presented at the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Atlanta, GA.
27. Dunn, K. E., Airola, D. T., Lo, W., & Garrison, M. (in press). Becoming data-driven:Exploring teacher efficacy and concerns related to data-driven decision making. Journal of Experimental Education.
28. Dunn K.E., Rakes G.C. I think I can: An analysis of the influence of teacher efficacy on learner-centered beliefs. National Forum of Educational Administration and Supervision Journal 2008, 26(1):1-18.
29. Dunn K.E., Rakes G.C. Producing caring qualified teachers: An exploration of the influence of pre-service teacher concerns on learner-centeredness. Teaching and Teacher Education 2010, 26:516-521.
30. Earl L., Katz S. Leading schools in a data-rich world. Second international handbook of educational leadership and administration 2002, 1003-1022. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht. K. Leithwood, P. Hallinger (Eds.).
31. Edmonds R. Effective schools for the urban poor. Educational Leadership 1979, 37:15-27.
32. Evans A. No Child Left Behind and the quest for educational equality: The role of teachers' collective sense of efficacy. Leadership and Policy in Schools 2009, 8:64-91.
33. Fabrigar L.R., Wegener D.T., MacCallum R.C., Strahan E.J. Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods 1999, 4:272-299.
34. Fives H., Buehl M.M. Examining the factor structure of the teachers' sense of efficacy scale. Journal of Experimental Education 2010, 78:118-134.
35. Floyd F.J., Widaman K.F. Factor analysis in the development and refinement of clinical assessment instruments. Psychological Assessment 1995, 7:286-299.
36. Fuller E.J., Johnson J.F. Can state accountability systems drive improvements in school performance for children of color and children from low-income homes?. Education and Urban Society 2001, 33(3):260-283.
37. Ghaith G., Shaaban K. The relationship between perceptions of teaching concerns, teacher efficacy, and selected teacher characteristics. Teaching and Teacher Education 1999, 15:487-496.
38. Gordon C., Lim L., McKinnon D., Nkala F. Learning approach, control orientation and self-efficacy of beginning teacher education students. Asia Pacific Journal of Teacher and Development 1998, 1:53-63.
39. Greenwood G.E., Olejnik S.F., Parkay F.W. Relationships between four teacher efficacy belief patterns and selected teacher characteristics. Journal of Research and Development in Education 1990, 23:102-106.
40. Gresham G. An examination of mathematics teacher efficacy and mathematics anxiety in elementary pre-service teachers. Journal of Classroom Interaction 2009, 44(2):22-38.
41. Guskey T.R. Measurement of responsibility teachers assume for academic successes and failures in the classroom. Journal of Teacher Education 1981, 32:44-51.
42. Hancock, G. R., & Mueller, R. O. (2001). Rethinking construct reliability within latent variable systems. In R. Cudeck, S. H. C. du Toit, & D. Sorbom (Eds.), Structural equation modeling: Past and present. A Festschrift in honor of Karl G. Joreskog (pp. 195-261). Chicago: Scientific Software International.
43. Hatcher L. A step-by-step approach to using the SAS system for factor analysis and structural equation modeling 1994, The SAS Institute, Cary, NC.
44. Hoffman B. " I can, but I'm afraid to try": The role of self-efficacy beliefs and mathematics anxiety in mathematics problem-solving efficiency. Learning and Individual Differences 2010, 20(3):276-283.
45. Horn J.L. A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika 1965, 30:179-185.
46. Hu L., Bentler P. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling 1999, 10:435-455.
47. International Congress for School Effectiveness and Improvement (2011). The data use network meeting. http://www.icsei.net/icsei2011/datausenetwork.
48. Klassen R.M., Tze V.M.C., Betts S.M., Gordon K.A. Teacher efficacy research1998-2009: Signs of progress or unfulfilled promise?. Educational Psychology Review 2011, 23:21-43.
49. Learner, D. K., & Timberlake, L. M. (1995). Teachers with limited computer knowledge: Variables affecting use and hints to increase use. Retrieved from ERIC, database (ED384595).
50. Mandinach, E. B., Rivas, L., Light, D., Heinze, C., & Honey, M. (2006, April). The impact of data-driven decision making tools on educational practice: A systems analysis of six school districts. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Fransico, CA.
51. Marsh J.A., Pane J.F., Hamilton L.S. Making sense of data-driven decision making in education 2006, RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA.
52. Mawhinney, H. B., Frusicante, A. F., Aaron, P., Lui, Y. (2002). Design principles for learner-centered schools: Building effective strategies for addressing the achievement gap. College Park, MD: Center for Education Policy and Leadership. http://www.education.umd.edu/EDPL.
53. Means, B., Chen, E., DeBarger, A., & Padilla, C. (2011). Teachers' ability to use data to inform instruction: Challenges and supports. Washington, D.C: U.S. Department of Education Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development. http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCEQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww2.ed.gov%2Frschstat%2Feval%2Fdata-to-inform-instruction%2Freport.doc&ei=fXSFUMXnIMfKqAHQi4CQDw&usg=AFQjCNFct0dzWDiTqxJXR5YC5W9AEkO5Og.
54. Messelt, J. (2004). Data-driven decision making: A powerful tool for school improvement [White paper]. https://www.erdc.k12.mn.us/promo/sage/images/Analytics_WhitePaper.pdf.
55. Midgley C., Feldlaufer H., Eccles J.S. Change in teacher efficacy and student self- and task-related beliefs in mathematics during the transition to junior high school. Journal of Educational Psychology 1989, 81(2):247-258.
56. Millsap R.M. Structural equation modeling made difficult. Personality and Individual Differences 2007, 42:875-881.
57. Muthén L.K., Muthén B.O. Mplus user's guide 2008, Muthén & Muthén, Los Angeles, CA. 5th ed.
58. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (2002). Pub. L. No. 107-110, § 115, Stat. 1425 (2002).
59. Nosal, M., & Nosal, E. (2003, June). Three-parameter Weibull generator for replacing missing observations. In Paper presented at the meeting of the international conference on statistics and related fields, Honolulu, HI.
60. Pajares F. Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of Educational Research 1996, 66:533-578.
61. Penev S., Raykov T. On the relationship between maximal validity and maximal reliability for linear composites. Multivariate Behavioral Research 2006, 41:105-126.
62. Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk D. H. (1996). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
63. Pintrich P.R., Schrauben B. Students' motivational beliefs and their cognitive engagement in classroom academic tasks. Student perceptions in the classroom: Causes and consequences 1992, 149-183. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ. D. Schunk, J. Meece (Eds.).
64. Rallis S.F., MacMullen M.M. Inquiry-minded schools: Opening doors for accountability. Phi Delta Kappan 2000, 81(10):766-773.
65. Raykov T. Estimation of composite reliability with congeneric measures. Applied Psychological Measurement 1997, 22:173-185.
66. Raykov T. A method for examining stability in reliability. Multivariate Behavioral Research 2000, 35:289-305.
67. Raykov T. Evaluation of criterion validity for scales with congeneric measures. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development 2007, 40:110-118.
68. Raykov T., Shrout P. Reliability of scales with general structure: Point and interval estimation using a structural equation modeling approach. Structural Equation Modeling 2002, 9:195-212.
69. Reise S.P., Waller N.G., Comrey A.L. Factor analysis and scale revision. Psychological Assessment 2000, 12:287-297.
70. Ross J.A. Teacher efficacy and the effects of coaching on student achievement. Canadian Journal of Education 1992, 17:51-65.
71. Samuel M. Accountability to whom? For what? Teacher identity and the force field model of teacher development. Perspectives in Education 2008, 26(2):3-16.
72. Scheurich J.J., Skrla L. Leadership for equity and excellence: Creating high-achievement classrooms, schools, and districts 2003, Corwin Press, Thousands Oaks, CA.
73. Schwarzer R., Hallum S. Perceived teacher self-efficacy as a predictor of job stress and burnout: Mediation analyses. Applied Psychology 2008, 57:152-171.
74. Shapley, K. S., Benner, A. D., Pieper, A. M., & Way, P. J. (2003, April). Integrating technology into teacher education: Navigating the complexity of institutional change. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, Illinois.
75. Shaughnessy M.F. An interview with Anita Woolfolk: The educational psychology of teacher efficacy. Educational Psychology Review 2004, 16(2):153-176.
76. Snipes, J., Doolittle, F., & Herlihy, C. (2002). Foundations for success: Case studies of how urban school systems improve student achievement. New York, NY: MDRC.
77. State Department of Education (2011). Statewide report card 2010-2011. http://www.ode.state.or.us/data/annreportcard/rptcard2011.pdf.
78. Stiggins R.J. Student-involved classroom assessment 2001, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ. 3rd ed.
79. Straub E.T. Understanding technology adoption: Theory and future directions for informal learning. Review of Educational Research 2009, 79(2):625-649.
80. Stringfield S. Outlier studies of school effects. Advances in school effectiveness research 1994, 73-83. Pergamon, Oxford, England. D. Reynolds, B. Creemers, P. Nesselrodt, E. Schaffer, S. Stringfield, C. Teddlie (Eds.).
81. Sunderman G.L. Holding NCLB accountable: Achieving accountability, equity, and school reform 2008, Corwin Press, Thousands Oaks, CA.
82. Tschannen-Moran M., Hoy A.W. Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education 2001, 17:783-805.
83. Tschannen-Moran M., Hoy A.W. The differential antecedents of self-efficacy beliefs of novice and experienced teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education 2007, 23:944-956.
84. Tschannen-Moran M., Hoy A.W., Hoy W.K. Teacher-efficacy: Its meaning and measure. Review of Educational Research 1998, 68:202-248.
85. U.S. Department of Education, Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development (2008). Teachers' use of student data systems to improve instruction: 2005 to 2007. Washington, DC: Author.
86. U.S. Department of Education, Office of Elementary and Secondary Education (2009). Guidance on school improvement grants under section 1003(g) of the elementary and secondary education act of 1965. http://www2.ed.gov/programs/sif/guidance-20091218.doc.
87. U.S. Department of Education, Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development (2010). Teachers' ability to use data to inform instruction: Challenges and supports. Washington, DC: Author.
88. U.S. Department of Education, Office of Elementary and Secondary Education (2012, February). ESEA flexibility review guidance. http://www.ed.gov/esea/flexibility.
89. Volante L., Fazio X. Exploring teacher candidates' assessment literacy: Implications for teacher education reform and professional development. Canadian Journal of Education 2007, 30:749-770.
90. Wayman J.C. Involving teachers in data-driven decision-making: Using computer data systems to support teacher inquiry and reflection. Journal of Education for Students Placed At Risk 2005, 10(3):295-308.
91. Wayman J.C., Cho V. Preparing educators to effectively use student data systems. Handbook on Data-Based Decision-Making in Education 2008, 89-104. Routledge, New York. T.J. Kowalski, T.J. Lasley (Eds.).
92. Wayman, J. C., Midgley, S., & Stringfield, S. (2006, April). Leadership for data-based decision-making collaborative educator teams. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
93. Weber, G. (1971). Inner city children can be taught to read: Four successful schools (occasional paper no. 18). Washington, DC: Council for Basic Education.
94. Williams, A. S. (2010). Statistics anxiety and instructor immediacy. Journal of Statistics Education, 18(2), 1-18. http://www.amstat.org/publications/jse?v18n2/williams.pdf.
95. Zeidner M. Statistics and mathematics anxiety in social science students: Some interesting parallels. British Journal of Educational Psychology 1991, 61:319-328.