Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Measuring Teacher Educators’ Researcherly Disposition: Item Development and Scale Construction

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Vocations and Learning Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study reports on the development of a self-reported measurement instrument – The Teacher Educators’ Researcherly Disposition Scale (TERDS) – to improve understanding of teacher educators’ researcherly disposition. Teacher educators’ researcherly disposition refers to the habit of mind to engage with research – both as consumers and producers – to improve their practice and contribute to the knowledge base on teacher education. Taking into account the shortcomings of the emerging field of teacher educator professional development research (which is largely confined to small-scale, qualitative studies), a large-scale quantitative survey study (n = 944) was conducted. The first part of the article reports the results of factor analysis (EFA and CFA), which suggest a four-factor structure of teacher educators’ researcherly disposition: (1) ‘valuing research’ (α = .86), (2) ‘being a smart consumer of research’ (α = .89), (3) ‘being able to conduct research’ (α = .82), and (4) ‘conducting research’ (α = .87). Goodness of fit estimates were calculated, indicating good fit. The second part of the article explores differences in teacher educators’ researcherly disposition across several subgroups of teacher educators using the developed instrument. Results indicate that having research experience leads to significantly higher scores on each of the subscales. Furthermore, significantly higher scores were found for those with more than 3 years’ experience as a teacher educator, as well as for those without (prior) teaching experience in compulsory education. To conclude, the implications for further research and practices related to teacher educators’ professional development are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • APA NCME Aera. (2015). Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing. Washington: American Educational Research Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bates, T., Swennen, A., & Jones, K. (2011). The Professional Development of Teacher Educators. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berry, A. (2007). Tensions in Teaching about Teaching: Understanding Practices as a Teacher Educator. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berry, A. (2013). Teacher educators’ professional learning: A necessary case of “on your own”? Paper presented at the International Study Association of Teachers and Teaching (ISATT), Ghent, Belgium, 1-5 July.

  • Billett, S. (2005). Being competent: the relational interdependence between individual and social agency in working life. In Gruber, H., Harteis, C., Mulder, R., & Rehrl, M. (Eds.), Bridging individual, organisational, and cultural perspectives on professional learning (pp.113–132). Regensburg: Germany Roderer.

  • Billet, S. (2008). Subjectivity, learning and work: sources & legacies. Vocations and Learning, 1(1), 149–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruggink, M., & Harinck, F. (2012). De onderzoekende houding van leraren: wat wordt daaronder verstaan? [Teachers’ Inquiry Habit of Mind: What does this Mean?]. Tijdschrift voor Lerarenopleiders (VELON/VELOV), 33(3), 46–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, F. F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 14(3), 464–504.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 233–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cochran-Smith, M. (2005). Teacher educators as researchers: multiple perspectives. Teaching Teachers, 21(2), 219–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. (2009). Inquiry as stance: practitioner research for the next generation. New York: Teacher College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cochran-Smith, M., & Zeichner, K. M. (2005). Executive Summary: The report of the AERA panel on research and teacher education. In M. Cochran-Smith & K. M. Zeichner (Eds.), Studying Teacher Education (pp. 1–36). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cole, D. A., Ciesla, J. A., & Steiger, J. H. (2007). The insidious effects of failing to include design-driven correlated residuals in latent-variable covariance structure analysis. Psychological Methods, 12(4), 381–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cranton, P. (2002). Teaching for transformation. In J.M. Ross-Gordon (Ed.), New directions for adult and continuing education: No. 93. Contemporary viewpoints on teaching adults effectively (pp. 63–71). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

  • Desimone, L. M. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational Researcher, 38(3), 181–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2013). Supporting Teacher Educators. Brussels: EC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., Anderson, R., & Tatham, R. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). Uppersaddle River, N.J.: Pearson Prentice Hall

  • Hamilton, M. L., & Clandinin, D. J. (2011). Unpacking our assumptions about teacher educators around the world. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(2), 243–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cut-off criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kane, M. T. (2013). Validating the interpretations and uses of test scores. Journal of Educational Measurement, 50(1), 1–73. doi:10.1111/jedm.12000.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Katz, L. G., & Raths, J. D. (1985). Dispositions as goals for teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 1(4), 301–307.

  • Lanier, J. E., & Little, W. J. (1986). Research on Teacher Education. In M. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Teaching (pp. 527–569). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loughran, J. (2006). Developing a Pedagogy of Teacher Education. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loughran, J. (2014). Professionally developing as a teacher educator. Journal of Teacher Education, 65(4), 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loughran, J., & Berry, A. (2005). Modelling by teacher educators. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(2), 193–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lunenberg, M., Dengerink, J., & Korthagen, F. (2014). The professional teacher educator: Professional roles, behaviour and development of teacher educators. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

  • Mezirow, J. (1997). Transformative learning: Theory to practice. In P. Cranton (Ed.), New directions for adult and continuing education: No. 74. Transformative learning in action: Insights from practice (pp. 5–12). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

  • Milfont, T. L., & Fischer, R. (2010). Testing measurement invariance across groups: applications in cross-cultural research. International Journal of Psychological Research, 3(1), 2011–2084.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murray, J., & Male, T. (2005). Becoming a teacher educator: evidence from the field. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(2), 125–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998–2011). Mplus User’s Guide (6 th ed.). Los Angeles: Muthén & Muthén.

  • Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric Theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Connor, B. P. (2000). SPSS and SAS programs for determining the number of components using parallel analysis and Velicer’s MAP test. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 32, 396–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perkins, D. N., Jay, E., & Tishman, S. (1993). Beyond abilities: a dispositional theory of thinking. Merill-Palmer Quaterly: Journal of Developmental Psychology, 39(1), 1–21.

  • Smith, K. (2003). So, what about the professional development of teacher educators? European Journal of Teacher Education, 26(2), 201–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, K. (2010). Professional Development of Teacher Educators. In (eds.) (2010). International Encyclopaedia of Education (3 rd ed.), Amsterdam: Elsevier.

  • Snoek, M., & Zogla, I. (2009). Teacher Education in Europe: Main Characteristics and Development. In A. Swennen & M. van der Klink (Eds.), Becoming a teacher educator: Theory and practice for teacher educators (pp. 11–28). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using Multivariate Statistics. Boston: Pearson/Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tack, H., & Vanderlinde, R. (2014). Teacher educators’ professional development: towards a typology of teacher educators’ researcherly disposition. British Journal of Educational Studies, 62(3), 297–315.

  • Watson, D. (2000). Lifelong Learning and Professional Higher Education. In T. Bourner, T. Katz, & D. Watson (Eds.), New directions in professional higher education (pp. 3–10). Buckingham: OUP.

  • Wilson, S. M. (2006). Finding a canon and core: meditations on the preparation of teacher educator-researchers. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(3), 315–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeichner, K. (2005). Becoming a teacher educator: a personal perspective. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(2), 117–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the three anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Educational Studies, Ghent University, Henri Dunantlaan 2, B9000, Ghent, Belgium

    Hanne Tack & Ruben Vanderlinde

Authors
  1. Hanne Tack
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ruben Vanderlinde
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hanne Tack.

Appendix A: Example of TERDS with instructions

Appendix A: Example of TERDS with instructions

In this survey research is defined as ‘the systematic investigation into and study of materials and sources in order to develop (1) knowledge, new theories or answer questions occurring from (2) practice or (3) policy’. Research conducted by teacher educators can be practitioner research, practice-based research, research and development projects, policy-related research and fundamental research.

Answer each of the statements.

figure a

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tack, H., Vanderlinde, R. Measuring Teacher Educators’ Researcherly Disposition: Item Development and Scale Construction. Vocations and Learning 9, 43–62 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12186-016-9148-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12186-016-9148-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation