Teachers judging student performance mostly use performance cues and, to a lesser extent, student cues¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2024 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? The review reports, citing prior studies with the same tasks, that teachers mostly use performance cues but also frequently student cues when judging students' performance. → van de Pol 2024

Evidence¶

van de Pol 2024¶

van de Pol, J., & Oudman, S. (2024). Teachers' judgment accuracy of students' monitoring skills: a conceptual and methodological framework and explorative study. Metacognition and Learning. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-023-09349-8

q2 · i? · associational · r2

The review attributes this to Van de Pol et al. (2019, 2021a, b), in which secondary teachers judged students' performance from diagrams, student names, and task materials, deducing performance, student, and task cues. A study of Oudman et al. (2018) with primary teachers judging mathematics showed similar results.

"These studies showed that teachers mostly use performance cues but also frequently student cues."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• When making accurate judgments, teachers used diagnostic cues to a greater extent, but also used non-diagnostic cues (IQ and reading self-concept)
• Teachers judge more accurately with only diagnostic cues than with a mix of diagnostic and non-diagnostic cues
• Performance cues were found most diagnostic for students' reading comprehension performance — related
• Students tend to rely on non-diagnostic cues when judging their own performance, resulting in inaccurate judgments — related
• Teachers often rely on informal impressions rather than systematic, theory-grounded diagnostic procedures when judging students' SRL — related