{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02877070619006103, 'fraction_numerical': 0.020924149956408022, 'mean_word_length': 5.597701149425287, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Sensitive Field Observation Of Teaching Performance

Current research efforts aimed at identifying particular teaching skills that are linked with higher achievement have two problems. First, linkages are modest or weak according to recent reviewers (Dunkin & Biddle, 1974; Gage, 1978; Medley, 1977). Second, the reliability of particular teaching behaviors as measured by observers is often low or nonexistent (Shavelson & Dempsey, 1976; Erlich & Shavelson, 1978), and this in itself may reduce any relationships. There may be a shorter and more fruitful route through the malaise by attempting to reliably identify outstanding teacher-performers. A recent post hoc study illustrating this approach found a single teacher had measurable positive influences on subsequent student grades and adult social status (Pederson, Faucher, & Eaton, 1978)! One of the central issues in the ongoing debate about the virtues of a performance-based teaching concept is whether such a performance is measurable in the traditional sense; whether ability varies systematically and distinguishes between teachers who perform relatively better or worse than others.