1. Introducing the Postsecondary Instructional Practices Survey (PIPS): A Concise, Interdisciplinary, and Easy-to-Score Survey
- Author
-
Emily M. Walter, Cody Tyler Williams, Andrea Beach, and Charles Henderson
- Subjects
Male ,Models, Educational ,Interdisciplinary Studies ,Predictor variables ,Test validity ,01 natural sciences ,Article ,General Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology ,Education ,Postsecondary education ,Surveys and Questionnaires ,0103 physical sciences ,Mathematics education ,Humans ,010306 general physics ,Demography ,Teaching ,05 social sciences ,Reproducibility of Results ,050301 education ,Sample Size ,College instruction ,Female ,Factor Analysis, Statistical ,Psychology ,0503 education - Abstract
The Postsecondary Instructional Practices Survey (PIPS) is a valid and reliable measure of self-reported instructional practices of postsecondary instructors, including individuals outside science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. This paper describes the development and validation processes, scoring conventions and results outputs, and applications of the PIPS., Researchers, administrators, and policy makers need valid and reliable information about teaching practices. The Postsecondary Instructional Practices Survey (PIPS) is designed to measure the instructional practices of postsecondary instructors from any discipline. The PIPS has 24 instructional practice statements and nine demographic questions. Users calculate PIPS scores by an intuitive proportion-based scoring convention. Factor analyses from 72 departments at four institutions (N = 891) support a 2- or 5-factor solution for the PIPS; both models include all 24 instructional practice items and have good model fit statistics. Factors in the 2-factor model include (a) instructor-centered practices, nine items; and (b) student-centered practices, 13 items. Factors in the 5-factor model include (a) student–student interactions, six items; (b) content delivery, four items; (c) formative assessment, five items; (d) student-content engagement, five items; and (e) summative assessment, four items. In this article, we describe our development and validation processes, provide scoring conventions and outputs for results, and describe wider applications of the instrument.
- Published
- 2016
- Full Text
- View/download PDF