CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 3Student Assessment and FeedbackEducation, Achievement, and GiftednessTeacher Education and Leadership Studies

Development of Self-Observation Assessment Rubrics to Improve Teacher Competency in Creative Gifted Education

Yoon, Jinkyung, Lee, Kyunghwa·2026·Gifted Education International
DOI 10.1177/02614294251379176
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to develop self-observation assessment metrics and rubrics for teachers in gifted education, with a particular emphasis on nurturing creativity. The objective of the developed metrics and rubrics is to facilitate systematic self-evaluation, promote reflective practice, and support continuous instructional improvement. A total of 65 metrics with preliminary expert validation, organized into three instructional stages (Preparation, Implementation, and Evaluation), were generated through a multi-phase process that included a comprehensive literature review, expert review, and iterative tool refinement. Based on these metrics, three tools were developed: a self-assessment checklist, an observer checklist, and a rubric. These tools are designed to support gifted education teachers in understanding student diversity, implementing differentiated instructional strategies, and enhancing creative instructional practices. This framework offers a structured model informed by theory and expert input, with the potential to contribute to instructional development for teachers and the creative growth of gifted learners. While the tools showed promising usability in a small-scale pilot study, further research is needed to conduct full psychometric validation and to examine their long-term impact on teacher effectiveness, student creativity, and applicability across diverse educational settings.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/02614294251379176

Cites

21 of 21 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Yoon, J., & Lee, K.
Affiliations
Soongsil University (KR)
Corresponding author
Yoon, Jinkyung
ORCID
Venue
Gifted Education International
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2025-09-12
Volume
42
Issue
1
Pages
169-182
ISSN
  • 0261-4294 (ISSN-L)
  • 2047-9077
DOI
10.1177/02614294251379176
OpenAlex
W4414269718
Cited by
3
References
21
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1
FWCI
9.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
Gifted Education International (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Education, Achievement, and Giftedness
  • Social Sciences › Education › Teacher Education and Leadership Studies
Keywords
assessment rubrics, gifted education, teacher creativity, teacher self-assessment, reflective practice, differentiated instruction, teaching improvement, self-assessment checklist, teacher competence

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review