Teacher-centered analysis with TIMSS and PIRLS data: weighting approaches, accuracy, and precision

Abstract This paper extends existing work on teacher weighting in student-centered surveys by looking into aspects of practical implementation of deriving and using weights for teacher-centered analysis in the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) and the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS). The formal conditions to compute teacher-centered weights are detailed, including mathematical equations. We provide a proposal on how to define the targeted populations as well as how to collect data that is needed to derive teacher-centered weights, yet currently unavailable. We also tackle the issue of teacher nonresponse by proposing a respective adjustment factor, as well as mentioning the challenge of multiple selection probabilities when teachers teach in multiple schools. The core part of the paper focuses on studying the level of accuracy that can be expected when estimating teacher population characteristics. We use TIMSS 2019 data and simulate likely scenarios regarding the variance in weights. The results show that (i) the different weighting scenarios lead to relatively similar estimates; however, the differences between the scenarios are sufficient to justify the recommendation to use correctly derived teacher weights; (ii) differences between estimated standard errors based on complex sampling and corresponding estimates based on simple random sampling are sufficiently consistent to support use of a procedure to estimate standard errors that accounts for both sample weights and the complex sampling design; (iii) sample sizes and variance in weights significantly limit estimate precision, so that total population estimates with sufficient precision are available in the majority of countries but subpopulation features are generally not sufficiently precise. To provide a critical evaluation of our results, we recommend implementation of the proposed method in one or more countries. This recommended study will permit examination of logistical considerations in implementation of required changes in data acquisition and will provide data to replicate the analysis with teacher-centered weights.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Large-scale Assessments in Education
Published
2024-08-20
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40536-024-00214-x
Citations
4
Primary Topic
Gender and Technology in Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
3.72

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Teacher-centered analysis with TIMSS and PIRLS data: weighting approaches, accuracy, and precision

Shelby J. Haberman, Sabine Meinck, A. J. Koop
4 citations
Large-scale Assessments in Education
Gender and Technology in Education
3.72
article

Teacher-centered analysis with TIMSS and PIRLS data: weighting approaches, accuracy, and precision

Shelby J. Haberman, Sabine Meinck, A. J. Koop
article en
4 citations

Abstract

Abstract This paper extends existing work on teacher weighting in student-centered surveys by looking into aspects of practical implementation of deriving and using weights for teacher-centered analysis in the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) and the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS). The formal conditions to compute teacher-centered weights are detailed, including mathematical equations. We provide a proposal on how to define the targeted populations as well as how to collect data that is needed to derive teacher-centered weights, yet currently unavailable. We also tackle the issue of teacher nonresponse by proposing a respective adjustment factor, as well as mentioning the challenge of multiple selection probabilities when teachers teach in multiple schools. The core part of the paper focuses on studying the level of accuracy that can be expected when estimating teacher population characteristics. We use TIMSS 2019 data and simulate likely scenarios regarding the variance in weights. The results show that (i) the different weighting scenarios lead to relatively similar estimates; however, the differences between the scenarios are sufficient to justify the recommendation to use correctly derived teacher weights; (ii) differences between estimated standard errors based on complex sampling and corresponding estimates based on simple random sampling are sufficiently consistent to support use of a procedure to estimate standard errors that accounts for both sample weights and the complex sampling design; (iii) sample sizes and variance in weights significantly limit estimate precision, so that total population estimates with sufficient precision are available in the majority of countries but subpopulation features are generally not sufficiently precise. To provide a critical evaluation of our results, we recommend implementation of the proposed method in one or more countries. This recommended study will permit examination of logistical considerations in implementation of required changes in data acquisition and will provide data to replicate the analysis with teacher-centered weights.

Large-scale Assessments in EducationVol. 12(1)
International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Gender and Technology in Education
3.72
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.