Previous Article in Journal
Meta-Analysis for Math Teachers’ Professional Development and Students’ Achievement
Previous Article in Special Issue
Exploring Relationships Between Qualitative Student Evaluation Comments and Quantitative Instructor Ratings: A Structural Topic Modeling Framework
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
This is an early access version, the complete PDF, HTML, and XML versions will be available soon.
Article

Measuring Mathematics Teaching Quality: The State of the Field and a Call for the Future

by
Melissa A. Gallagher
1,*,
Timothy D. Folger
2,
Temple A. Walkowiak
3,
Anne Garrison Wilhelm
4 and
Jeremy Zelkowski
5
1
US Math Recovery Council, Eagan, MN 55121, USA
2
College of Community and Public Affairs, Binghamton University, Binghamton, NY 13902, USA
3
College of Education, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695, USA
4
Simmons School of Education and Human Development, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, TX 75205, USA
5
College of Education, The University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL 35401, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Educ. Sci. 2025, 15(9), 1158; https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15091158
Submission received: 28 June 2025 / Revised: 25 August 2025 / Accepted: 26 August 2025 / Published: 4 September 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Recent Advances in Measuring Teaching Quality)

Abstract

To better understand how teaching quality has been conceptualized and measured within the sub-field of mathematics education, we conducted a systematic review of 24 journals to identify instruments that have been used to measure mathematics teaching quality; which instruments have interpretation and use statements; and the validity, reliability, and fairness evidence for each instrument. We found 47 instruments with validity, reliability, and fairness evidence. These instruments primarily captured teachers’ enactment of specific teaching practices through classroom observations or student questionnaires. Some instruments captured approximations of practice through teacher questionnaires or interviews. Only two instruments presented an integrated interpretation and use argument (IUA) framework, although eleven included at least one component of an IUA framework. We found that measure developers were most likely to present reliability evidence and evidence related to test content, internal structure, and relations to other variables. They were least likely to present evidence related to response processes, consequences of testing, or fairness. These findings suggest that although there are many instruments of mathematics teaching quality, instrument developers still have considerable work to do in collecting and presenting validity and fairness evidence for these instruments.
Keywords: mathematics education; teaching quality; instrument development; teacher behavior; validity evidence; measurement; fairness mathematics education; teaching quality; instrument development; teacher behavior; validity evidence; measurement; fairness

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Gallagher, M.A.; Folger, T.D.; Walkowiak, T.A.; Wilhelm, A.G.; Zelkowski, J. Measuring Mathematics Teaching Quality: The State of the Field and a Call for the Future. Educ. Sci. 2025, 15, 1158. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15091158

AMA Style

Gallagher MA, Folger TD, Walkowiak TA, Wilhelm AG, Zelkowski J. Measuring Mathematics Teaching Quality: The State of the Field and a Call for the Future. Education Sciences. 2025; 15(9):1158. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15091158

Chicago/Turabian Style

Gallagher, Melissa A., Timothy D. Folger, Temple A. Walkowiak, Anne Garrison Wilhelm, and Jeremy Zelkowski. 2025. "Measuring Mathematics Teaching Quality: The State of the Field and a Call for the Future" Education Sciences 15, no. 9: 1158. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15091158

APA Style

Gallagher, M. A., Folger, T. D., Walkowiak, T. A., Wilhelm, A. G., & Zelkowski, J. (2025). Measuring Mathematics Teaching Quality: The State of the Field and a Call for the Future. Education Sciences, 15(9), 1158. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15091158

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop