Exploring the Psychometrics and the Utility of the ProCAD Instrument

In order to evaluate the psychometric properties of a measure of Teacher Candidates’ classroom dispositions, the Professional Competencies, Attitudes, and Dispositions (ProCAD), it was administered to 189 yoked rater triads (i.e., Teacher Candidates, Mentor Teachers, and Faculty Supervisors) during the 2018-2019 school year at two timepoints (i.e., Middle & End of professional experience) According to results from exploratory factor analyses, the ProCAD yields one factor. Internal consistency reliabilities for the ProCAD are strong (Range: "α = " .88 – .93). Interrater reliability was assessed through various methods. Two-way, Proficiency agreement was measured for each of the eight items and had the highest agreements (Middle & End; range: 70.33% - 98.72%). Results from a mean difference analysis (i.e., Two-Way, Repeated measures ANOVA) revealed statistically significant main effects for time ( p < .001) and stakeholders (p < .001) as well as a significant interaction effect, which became the focus of interpretation as dispositional ratings depend on both stakeholder and time, F(2, 266) = 15.01, p < 0.001, 〖 partial η〗^2 [eta-squared]=0.10. At the Middle point, based on a follow-up ANOVA, stakeholders’ scores were significantly different from each other, F(2, 266) = 27.42, p < 0.001. Results of post-hoc, pair-wise comparisons showed that Teacher Candidates’ (M = 26.94, SD= 3.26; p < 0.001) and Mentor Teachers’ (M = 26.88, SD= 3.47; p < 0.001) ratings were significantly higher than Faculty Supervisors’ ratings (M = 23.57, SD = 4.21). At the End point, ratings were similar across raters, F(2, 266) = 0.31, p = ns. Based on pairwise comparisons with a Bonferroni Correction, dispositional ratings also increased from the Middle of the professional experience to the End for all three raters: Candidates’ (p = 0.048), Faculty Supervisors’ (p < 0.001), and Mentor Teachers’ (p = 0.02). Limitations and implications are discussed.