IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/oec/eduaab/217-en.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Measuring process quality in early childhood education and care through Situational Judgement Questions: Findings from TALIS Starting Strong 2018 Field Trial

Author

Listed:
  • Trude Nilsen

    (University of Oslo)

  • Pauline Slot

    (Utrecht University)

  • Hynek Cigler

    (Muni Masaryk University)

  • Minge Chen

    (International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement)

Abstract

Situational Judgement Questions (SJQs) measuring process quality were included in the OECD Starting Strong Teaching and Learning International Survey 2018 (TALIS Starting Strong 2018) to address concerns of self-report bias in large-scale international surveys. These SJQs provide the staff in early childhood education and care with situations taken from a real-life professional context and offer several options on how to address these given situations. Using TALIS Starting Strong 2018 field trial data, this paper evaluates the reliability and validity of the SJQs as measures of process quality in a large-scale international survey. The results showed that the SJQs were reliable, valid and worked well in evaluating process quality. High process quality was characterised by: 1) supporting child-directed play; 2) managing conflicts through behavioural management; and 3) supporting pro-social behaviour by encouraging sharing and collaboration among children. Staff self efficacy and formal education were positively related to these practices. The paper further makes recommendations regarding the formats, type of analysis and interpretation of the SJQs in the Main Survey.

Suggested Citation

  • Trude Nilsen & Pauline Slot & Hynek Cigler & Minge Chen, 2020. "Measuring process quality in early childhood education and care through Situational Judgement Questions: Findings from TALIS Starting Strong 2018 Field Trial," OECD Education Working Papers 217, OECD Publishing.
    • Handle: RePEc:oec:eduaab:217-en
    DOI: 10.1787/852602c5-en
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1787/852602c5-en
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1787/852602c5-en?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oec:eduaab:217-en. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deoecfr.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.