Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Jul;56(7):1090-1096.
doi: 10.1111/jpc.14824. Epub 2020 Feb 27.

Teacher rating versus measured academic achievement: Implications for paediatric research

Rajesh Shah  1 , Gavin Brown  2 , Peter Keegan  3 , Nataliia Burakevych  1 , Jane E Harding  1 , Christopher Jd McKinlay  1   4 ; CHYLD Study Group  5
Affiliations

Teacher rating versus measured academic achievement: Implications for paediatric research

Rajesh Shah et al. J Paediatr Child Health. 2020 Jul.

Abstract

Aim: To determine whether teachers' reports of student academic performance can suffice for research purposes by comparing it with a curriculum-based standardised test.

Methods: In this longitudinal cohort study of children born at risk of neonatal hypoglycaemia, teachers' global assessment of student performance was compared with assessment tools for teaching and learning (asTTle) at 9-10 years. Performance on asTTLe was rated as being below, at or above that expected on the national curriculum for year and term of schooling. Teachers similarly rated the child's performance against the national curriculum.

Results: Of 125 children assessed, 104 had paired data for analysis. On asTTLe, 28% were rated below, 55% at and 17% above the expected curriculum level in reading and 24, 54 and 22%, respectively, in mathematics. Equivalent teacher ratings were 23, 58 and 19% in reading and 36, 55 and 9% in mathematics, respectively. However, there was limited agreement between asTTle and teacher rating of achievement in reading (κ = 0.23 (95% confidence interval 0.07-0.40)) and no significant agreement in mathematics (κ = 0.07 (95% confidence interval -0.09-0.22)). Only 45% of children performing below the curriculum level in reading and 52% in mathematics were correctly identified by teachers.

Conclusion: In cohort studies, teacher ratings cannot substitute standardised educational testing.

Keywords: academic achievement; assessment; paediatric research; standardised test; teacher rating.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Hack M, Taylor HG, Drotar D et al. Poor predictive validity of the Bayley Scales of Infant Development for cognitive function of extremely low birth weight children at school age. Pediatrics 2005; 116: 333-41.
    1. McKinlay CJ, Alsweiler J, Anstice N et al. Association of neonatal glycemia with neurodevelopmental outcomes at 4.5 years. JAMA Pediatr. 2017; 171: 1-12.
    1. Neisser U, Boodoo G, Bouchard TJ Jr et al. Intelligence: Knowns and unknowns. Am. Psychol. 1996; 51: 77-101.
    1. Crooks TJ. Classroom assessment in policy context (New Zealand). In: Petereson P, Baker EL, eds. The International Encyclopedia of Education, 3rd edn. Oxford: Elsevier; 2010; 443-8.
    1. Carmichael C. Discrepancies between standardised testing and teacher judgements in an Australian primary school context. Math. Teach. Educ. Dev. 2015; 17: 62-75.

LinkOut - more resources