This paper presents the results of a study searching for the extent to which student ratings and/or external observations can be used to measure the teacher factors of the dynamic model of educational effectiveness (see Kyriakides et al, 2021) and detect their effects on student achievement gains in English language. The Dynamic Model of Educational Effectiveness is  the conceptual framework of this study. It is important to highlight that no research based on a theoretical model has been used to identify factors of effective teaching in the Maldives. The Dynamic Model refers to the following eight factors which are concerned with teacher behavior in the classroom: orientation, structuring, questioning, teaching-modelling, applications, time management, teacher role in making classroom a learning environment, and classroom assessment. These eight factors do not refer to only one approach of teaching, such as structured or direct teaching (Joyce, Weil & Calhoun, 2000), or to approaches associated with constructivism (Schoenfeld, 1998). An integrated approach to defining quality of teaching is adopted (Elboj & Niemelä, 2010). In addition, the model is based on the assumption that the teacher factors can be measured by using five dimensions: frequency, focus, stage, quality and differentiation. These dimensions help us to identify both quantitative and qualitative characteristics of each factor. Many studies have been conducted in different parts of the world that tested the main assumptions of the Dynamic Model regarding factors operating at classroom level (e.g., Kyriakides et al., 2009; Kyriakides, Archambault et al., 2013; Antoniou et al., 2011; Christoforidou et al., 2014; Creemers et al., 2013a; Azkiyah et al., 2014; Panayiotou et al., 2014; Azigwe et al., 2016; Vanlaar et al., 2016; Kyriakides et al., 2017). These studies provided empirical support to the construct validity of the model. Each factor was found to be measured in relation to each of the five dimensions and their impact on student learning outcomes was identified. However, the great majority of these studies was conducted in European countries. Therefore, a study investigating the impact of teacher factors in the context of Maldives can help us explore the possibility of treating these factors as generic. In addition, both student ratings and external observations were used to measure quality of teaching. However, in a study conducted in Ghana, only data from external observations were able to detect effects of these factors on student achievement gains in mathematics. It is therefore important to see whether both methods of measuring teacher factors can help researchers in different countries detect effects of teacher factors on student learning outcomes.  Thus, the study presented here also aims to compare these two methods and search for the extent to which each method can not only generate valid and reliable data for each factor but also help us detect effects of each factor on student achievement. 

Participants  The study was conducted in the urban capital city Male’ in the Republic of Maldives which has 14 primary schools. The Male’ region was selected as this is the most populous city in the country with maximum number of primary schools situated in one island. Using the stage sampling procedure, initially four out of the six district regions were randomly selected. Eight schools agreed to participate in this study. All grade 4 class of the school sample (n=31) and their students (n=350) who received parental consent participated in the study which was conducted during the school year 2018-2019.    Student achievement in English language Data on student achievement in English language was collected by using external forms of assessment designed to assess knowledge and skills in English language which are identified in the Maldives National Curriculum of Year 4 (NIE., 2015). The construction of the tests was subject to controls for reliability and validity. The pre-test measure was administered at the beginning of the school year in February 2018, whereas the post-test was administered at the end of the school year in November 2018.   Student ratings A questionnaire was used to measure the eight teaching factors of the Dynamic Model and their dimensions. Specifically, with the use of a five-point Likert scale, students were asked to mark on the scale the extent to which their teacher behaves as per the factors and dimensions in their classroom. The student questionnaire measuring the factors of the dynamic model has been used in studies conducted in different countries (see Kyriakides et al., 2021; Panayiotou et al., 2014). This questionnaire was adapted to the context of Maldives and its face validity was tested by conducting interviews with 10 students in two primary schools in the Maldives which did not participate in the main study.   Observation Instruments Classroom observations were conducted to observe the teaching behavior of all grade 4 teachers. The high and the low inference observation instruments from the DM were used to generate data about each factor of the dynamic model and their measurement dimensions except of the factor concerned with student assessment. These two instruments were used in studies conducted in different countries and support to their validity and reliability has been provided (for a review of these studies (see Kyriakides et al., 2021).  

Analysis of data emerged from each technique provided support to the validity and reliability of the student questionnaire and the two observation instruments. However, multilevel regression analysis revealed that through the student questionnaire, effects of only three factors of the Dynamic Model  (i.e., orientation, application and dealing with student misbehavior) on student achievement were detected. On the other hand, observation data helped us to detect effects from all factors of the model (i.e orientation, structuring, questioning, teaching modelling, application, teachers’ role in making classroom a learning environment, management of time) on student achievement.    This paper therefore, argues for the importance of establishing a policy on quality of teaching in the Maldives by considering the factors included in the dynamic model. In addition, the strengths and limitations of using student ratings and external observers to measure quality of teaching are discussed. We also argue for the use of a more comprehensive measurement framework to measure quality of teaching especially since research in various countries support the use of both methods of measuring quality of teaching (McCutcheon, 1981; Reynolds, 2006; Teddlie et al., 2006; Williams, 1989). The limitations of this study are finally identified and suggestions for further research are provided. The importance of conducting studies on the impact of teacher factors in different contexts is stressed especially since the factors of the dynamic model are treated as generic in nature.  

Azkiyah, S.N., Doolaard, S., Creemers, B.P.M., & Van Der Werf, M.P.C. (2014). The effects of two intervention programs on teaching quality and student achievement.Journal ofClassroom Interaction, 49(1), 4-11. Christoforidou, M., Kyriakides, L., Antoniou, P., & Creemers, B. P. (2014). Searching for stages of teacher's skills in assessment.Studies in Educational Evaluation,40, 1-11. Creemers, B. P., & Kyriakides, L. (2013). Improving quality in education: Dynamic approaches to school improvement. Routledge. Elboj, C., & Niemela, R. (2010). Sub-communities of mutual learners in the classroom: the case of Interactive groups. Revista de psicodidáctica, 15(2), 177-189 Kyriakides, L., Creemers, B. P., & Antoniou, P. (2009). Teacher behaviour and student outcomes: Suggestions for research on teacher training and professional development.Teaching and teacher education,25(1), 12-23. Kyriakides, L., Creemers, B. P. M., Panayiotou, A., Vanlaar, G., Pfeifer, M., Cankar, G., & McMahon, L. (2014). Using student ratings to measure quality of teaching in six European countries, European Journal of Teacher Education, 37(2), 125-143. Kyriakides, L., Creemers, B. P. M., Panayiotou, A., Vanlaar, G., Pfeifer, M., Cankar, G., & McMahon, L. (2014). Using student ratings to measure quality of teaching in six European countries,European Journal of Teacher Education, 37(2), 125-143. Kyriakides, L., Antoniou, P., & Dimosthenous, A. (2021). Does the duration of school interventions matter? The effectiveness and sustainability of using the dynamic approach to promote quality and equity. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 1-24. NIE [National Institute of Education] (2015). The national curriculum framework. Malé: National Institute of Education, Ministry of Education. https://www.moe.gov.mv/assets/upload/National_Curriculum_Framework_English.pdf McCutcheon, G. (1981). On the interpretation of classroom observations. Educational researcher, 10(5), 5-10. Panayiotou, A., Kyriakides, L., Creemers, B. P., McMahon, L., Vanlaar, G., Pfeifer, M., & Bren, M. (2014). Teacher behavior and student outcomes: Results of a European study. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 26(1), 73-93. Reynolds, A. J., & Temple, J. A. (2006). Economic returns of investments in preschool education. In A vision for universal preschool education (pp. 37-68). Cambridge University Press. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1998). Toward a theory of teaching-in-context. Issues in education, 4(1), 1-94. Teddlie, C., Creemers, B.P.M., Kyriakides, L., Muijs, D. & Yu, F. (2006). The international system for Teacher Observation and Feedback: Evolution of an international study of teacher effectiveness constructs.Educational Research and Evaluation, 12(6), 561-582. Vanlaar, G., Kyriakides, L., Panayiotou, A., Vandecandelaere, M., McMahon, L., De Fraine, B., & Van Damme, J. (2016). Do the teacher and school factors of the dynamic model affect high-and low-achieving student groups to the same extent? A cross-country study. Research Papers in Education, 31(2), 183-211..