View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Understanding Teachers' Interdisciplinary Role Perceptions: Scale Development and Importance-Performance Analysis

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Understanding Teachers' Interdisciplinary Role Perceptions: Scale Development and Importance-Performance Analysis
Language: English
Authors: Mei-Ju Chen (ORCID 0000-0001-9600-2008), Chao-Yu Guo, Li-Ting Tseng, Ming-Yi Chiu, Hsuan-Jui Weng (ORCID 0000-0002-5652-0887)
Source: Psychology in the Schools. 2025 62(9):3128-3143.
Availability: Wiley. Available from: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030. Tel: 800-835-6770; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: https://www.wiley.com/en-us
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 16
Publication Date: 2025
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Descriptors: Teacher Role, Role Perception, Interdisciplinary Approach, Attitude Measures, Factor Analysis, Test Reliability, Test Validity, Foreign Countries, Curriculum Development, Educational Assessment
Geographic Terms: Taiwan
DOI: 10.1002/pits.23529
ISSN: 0033-3085
1520-6807
Abstract: An interdisciplinary curriculum provides integration of students' subjects and lives, guiding students to understand and engage with changes in the world through real situations and problems, with teachers playing a critical role. However, there is no assessment tool to explore teachers' interdisciplinary role perceptions (TIRP). In this study, an interdisciplinary role perceptions scale for teachers (TIRPS) was developed through literature analysis, expert appropriateness assessment, exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, and Cronbach's alpha reliability review. The results of the questionnaire were analyzed through importance-performance analysis to understand the current situation of TIRP in Taiwan. First, we found that the TIRPS has good reliability and validity and might be used as a tool for related interdisciplinary research. Second, the importance and performance of "interdisciplinary curriculum development roles" of teachers were well perceived. Third, the performance of teachers in interdisciplinary professional development roles needs to be enhanced with regard to "diagnosing interdisciplinary learning difficulties" and "working with interdisciplinary knowledge." Fourth, teachers identified the need to prioritize the performance of "interdisciplinary multiple-assessment." Finally, this study provides recommendations for the ongoing development of teachers' interdisciplinary role perceptions and meaningful interdisciplinary practices to enhance student well-being.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2025
Accession Number: EJ1479925
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwFd4tbX5tDO3HWE6RAoDJAsAAAA4jCB3wYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHRMIHOAgEAMIHIBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDGXMSWTjE9ITs6hQiwIBEICBmoB6TP_VP4BEsNiwykIykE2ufHTDpjUkq1EcPWGxJKljBs3ntkV4zYqcwF5tleplJQ0ipO067eUjKpWPhU6XNSH1S3SdXwYcAWFot-ajhSRJZEA_FNvomNq1Ys31iv1vaW4WB1DQ22l8yZvQVm0tjeJBNH0MNgNYSjfgp7zAgPlswW2uF2Rmyu-OXj7Znie2klJGOhzwRYlPbZ8=
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0187257404;pis01sep.25;2025Aug14.01:14;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0187257404-1">Understanding Teachers' Interdisciplinary Role Perceptions: Scale Development and Importance–Performance Analysis </title> <p>An interdisciplinary curriculum provides integration of students' subjects and lives, guiding students to understand and engage with changes in the world through real situations and problems, with teachers playing a critical role. However, there is no assessment tool to explore teachers' interdisciplinary role perceptions (TIRP). In this study, an interdisciplinary role perceptions scale for teachers (TIRPS) was developed through literature analysis, expert appropriateness assessment, exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, and Cronbach's alpha reliability review. The results of the questionnaire were analyzed through importance‐performance analysis to understand the current situation of TIRP in Taiwan. First, we found that the TIRPS has good reliability and validity and might be used as a tool for related interdisciplinary research. Second, the importance and performance of "interdisciplinary curriculum development roles" of teachers were well perceived. Third, the performance of teachers in interdisciplinary professional development roles needs to be enhanced with regard to "diagnosing interdisciplinary learning difficulties" and "working with interdisciplinary knowledge." Fourth, teachers identified the need to prioritize the performance of "interdisciplinary multiple‐assessment." Finally, this study provides recommendations for the ongoing development of teachers' interdisciplinary role perceptions and meaningful interdisciplinary practices to enhance student well‐being.</p> <p>Summary: TIRPS, a reliable tool for exploring teachers' interdisciplinary roles in schools.Teachers' strong awareness of the importance and performance of their roles in interdisciplinary curriculum development.Emphasis on prioritizing "interdisciplinary multiple‐assessment" in teaching.</p> <p>Keywords: importance‐performance analysis; interdisciplinary; perception; teacher role</p> <hd id="AN0187257404-2">Introduction</hd> <p>Rapid changes in knowledge and technology are causing systematic impacts on global industries, officially ushering in the era of Education 4.0. Against this backdrop, the boundaries between different professional domains are gradually blurring, and industries are in need of talents with interdisciplinary expertise, as well as high levels of innovation and problem‐solving abilities (Darling‐Hammond et al. [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref1">7</reflink>]; Fullan et al. [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref2">10</reflink>]). Drake and Reid ([<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref3">9</reflink>]), as well as Ye and Xu ([<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref4">41</reflink>]), emphasize the importance of interdisciplinary curricula for cultivating 21st‐century literacy. At its 2021 conference, the International Society of the Learning Sciences (ISLS) highlighted that educational research and practitioners should focus on how humans engage in interdisciplinary learning. They emphasized the current lack of theoretical and practical integration, concepts, and methods in interdisciplinary curricula, calling for urgent attention to the design and research of interdisciplinary teaching (Anagün [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref5">2</reflink>]; Révai and Guerriero [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref6">34</reflink>]).</p> <p>Curriculum reforms in many countries are responding to the trend of interdisciplinary education. Finland advocates for "Phenomenon‐Based Teaching," emphasizing the integration of different types of subject knowledge into the curriculum based on students' real‐life experiences or inquiry topics (Finnish National Agency for Education, 2014). Singapore introduced "Holistic Learning Experiences," transforming students' real‐life experiences and developmental needs into interdisciplinary practical courses aimed at developing students' overall qualities (Ministry of Education Singapore [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref7">26</reflink>]).</p> <p>Curriculum Guidelines of 12‐Year Basic Education in Taiwan state that teachers should strengthen the integration and application of interdisciplinary or cross‐disciplinary courses through curriculum design (Ministry of Education [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref8">25</reflink>]). To provide learning experiences with both depth and breadth, curriculum content is gradually moving towards interdisciplinary and flexible approaches. Teaching emphasizes teamwork, prioritizing collaborative communication and hands‐on activities, ensuring that students benefit from interdisciplinary curriculum reforms.</p> <p>The investigation into teacher roles and their self‐perceived roles is gradually considered a key driver in the curriculum reform process (Huang [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref9">17</reflink>]; Klieger and Oster‐Levinz [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref10">21</reflink>]). Higher levels of teacher role perception are associated with better teaching engagement, subsequently enhancing participation in professional learning and performing well in curriculum innovation (Dirsa et al. [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref11">8</reflink>]; Ko et al. [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref12">22</reflink>]; Ye and Xu [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref13">41</reflink>]). Hairon ([<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref14">15</reflink>]) proposed that curriculum reform should consciously shift from policy implementation to autonomous actions by schools, with teachers playing a crucial role in both school and society. Teachers are expected to embrace a self‐development philosophy, continuously enhance their professional competence, and integrate interdisciplinary curriculum and instructional development with the demands of innovative values (Klieger and Oster‐Levinz [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref15">21</reflink>]; Mansilla [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref16">24</reflink>]).</p> <p>Differences in teachers' personal positions on curriculum reform philosophies, student learning, and vicarious experiences require shaping through the lens of professional role perception to facilitate reform implementation (Luyten and Bazo [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref17">23</reflink>]). Vansteenkiste et al. ([<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref18">39</reflink>]) found that teachers' awareness of and attitudes toward education influence their identification and engagement in teaching work. Teachers' interdisciplinary role perceptions (TIRP) in discussions on interdisciplinary curriculum design and instructional strategies with a professional attitude. They reflect on their actions during and after implementation to ensure the quality of the curriculum (Ramberg [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref19">32</reflink>]; García Torres [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref20">11</reflink>]). However, curriculum reform research has often focused on aspects such as curriculum promotion and effectiveness; there thus exists a research gap in empirically studying the role perceptions of teachers in the implementation of interdisciplinary reforms (Dirsa et al. [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref21">8</reflink>]). In the complex classroom environment, teachers engage in information processing based on their self‐perceived roles, utilizing the information processing approach, including perception conditions, responses, judgments, decisions, and actions, to make the most appropriate teaching decisions (Klieger and Oster‐Levinz [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref22">21</reflink>]). However, there remains a notable deficiency in scholarly examination of this particular area.</p> <p>For an extended period, the teacher's role has often been "assigned" and predominantly determined by external contexts, with teachers expected to fulfill specific roles imposed by these circumstances (Tao et al. [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref23">38</reflink>]). Exploration of teachers' intrinsic perspectives has been scarce. Given the contemporary educational context, exploring teachers' perceptions and shifts in interdisciplinary roles, along with their agency and performance in fulfilling these roles, is essential. Such insights are critical for understanding teachers' perspectives and actions concerning interdisciplinary roles amidst ongoing curriculum reforms, thus informing decisions related to curriculum and professional development policies. Accordingly, this study aims to develop and validate the Teachers' Interdisciplinary Role Perception Scale (TIRPS) and to examine teachers' perceived importance and actual performance of interdisciplinary roles using Importance–Performance Analysis (IPA), with the goal of informing teacher training and professional development in interdisciplinary education. The research questions guiding this study are as follows:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> 1. How reliable and valid is the teachers' interdisciplinary role perception scale?</item> <p></p> <item> 2. What are the current levels between the perceived importance and actual performance of teachers' interdisciplinary role perceptions (TIRP)?</item> <p></p> <item> 3. What implications do the identified importance–performance gaps in TIRP have for informing teacher training and professional development strategies?</item> </ulist> <hd id="AN0187257404-3">Literature Review</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0187257404-4">Teachers' Interdisciplinary Role Perceptions (TIRP)</hd> <p>Teacher roles involve an interactive relationship between teachers' self‐perceptions and external observations, allowing for the coordination of more effective interactive behaviors within social contexts. The realization of these positive interactive behaviors constitutes the embodiment of an individual playing the teacher role they identify with (Drake and Reid [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref24">9</reflink>]; Mansilla [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref25">24</reflink>]). Over the years, the discourse on teacher roles has been predominantly shaped by scholarly experts who, in various contexts, employ diverse criteria to research and analyze these roles (Chen [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref26">5</reflink>]; Klieger and Oster‐Levinz [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref27">21</reflink>]). Placing grassroots teachers under the scrutiny of evaluation in the public domain, there is a "demand" for teachers to undertake diverse role tasks, such as designing curricula, participating in professional development, conducting action research, and fostering autonomy. Simultaneously, there is an expectation for teachers to proactively transcend these frameworks and emerge as subjects of critical reflection (Fullan et al. [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref28">10</reflink>]; Huang [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref29">18</reflink>]).</p> <p>It is rooted in their perception and understanding of how they should act according to external expectations. Through the processes of role cognition, behavior, expectations, and evaluation, teachers generate corresponding behavioral performances. Teachers accumulate experiences from the ongoing teaching processes, interpret the meaning of societal structures, integrate and internalize their perceived values, and subsequently make decisions for action changes (Klieger and Oster‐Levinz [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref30">21</reflink>]; Özmen et al. [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref31">31</reflink>]). It is evident that the development of teacher role perception is a long‐term and ongoing process. Teachers undergo bidirectional interactions through self‐reflection and social contexts, actively engaging in practice through awareness, choice, and self‐determined involvement. When teachers perceive and believe in specific educational values as authentic, there is a potential for transforming these beliefs into actions. This self‐efficacy in learning and teaching serves as the starting point for teachers to initiate transformative actions (Tao et al. [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref32">38</reflink>]; Rao et al. [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref33">33</reflink>]). As education policies increasingly recognize teachers as the agents of reform, the hope is for teachers to transition from passive instructional implementers to active curriculum innovators and even autonomous curriculum researchers. The emphasis on teacher role perception, particularly focusing on teachers' voices, has gained prominence (Calvert [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref34">4</reflink>]; Darling‐Hammond et al. [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref35">7</reflink>]).</p> <p>Teachers are required to pay attention to the dynamism and continuity of students' learning processes, exhibiting behaviors that integrate learning experiences and knowledge to cultivate students' interdisciplinary literacy (Anagün [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref36">2</reflink>]). To achieve these objectives, teachers' proficiency in interdisciplinary knowledge, curriculum design, and curriculum research and development becomes the focal point of their professional learning endeavors (Drake and Reid [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref37">9</reflink>]; Révai and Guerriero [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref38">34</reflink>]). If teachers perceive that instructional changes are beneficial for students within the teacher‐student relationship, they are more inclined to participate in relevant learning activities to align with both personal and societal expectations of the "teacher" role (Abramczyk and Jurkowski [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref39">1</reflink>]; Huang [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref40">18</reflink>]). Hairon ([<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref41">15</reflink>]) suggested that teachers can engage with peers in activities such as sharing knowledge, reflecting on knowledge, interrogating knowledge, innovating knowledge, and applying knowledge. This approach helps teachers to become collaborative contributors and reflective inquirers in the promotion of interdisciplinary curricula.</p> <p>Teachers exhibit enthusiasm when engaging in the development of interdisciplinary curricula, driven by their deep connection to both the curriculum itself and their own sense of value derived from practical implementation (Gaspersz [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref42">12</reflink>]; Karaseva [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref43">20</reflink>]). Zaragoza et al. ([<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref44">42</reflink>]) discovered the significance of teachers' mindsets; when teachers break free from conventional frameworks and dare to experiment, positive student responses to their innovative attempts contribute to a sense of achievement and self‐worth. This, in turn, motivates teachers to persist in making changes. Teachers' motivation to actively implement interdisciplinary curriculum actions is not only rooted in their perceived competence in interdisciplinary teaching but also in their autonomous commitment, enhancing teachers' effectiveness in interdisciplinary teaching (Dirsa et al. [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref45">8</reflink>]; Vansteenkiste et al. [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref46">39</reflink>]).</p> <p>Furthermore, when teachers perceive an interdisciplinary curriculum not only as a policy requirement but as a crucial pathway guiding students towards the future and promoting human well‐being, their intrinsic motivation is driven by the meaning and value derived from their role within it. Teachers' autonomy, self‐determination, and agency, along with the ideals of the interdisciplinary curriculum, become tangible through this internal drive (Karaseva [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref47">20</reflink>]; Rao et al. [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref48">33</reflink>]). In summary, TIRP involves their recognition, under self and societal expectations of the "teacher" role, of the competence to undertake the responsibility for designing interdisciplinary curricula. The goal is to promote students' interdisciplinary learning and well‐being. Through practice, reflection, and responsiveness, teachers autonomously enhance the effectiveness of the interdisciplinary curriculum and teaching, showcasing a professional attitude towards the interdisciplinary curriculum.</p> <hd id="AN0187257404-5">The Dimensions and Connotations Among TIRP</hd> <p>Within the intricate context, teachers adopt a comprehensive, diverse, and integrated perspective, reflecting on their teaching actions and generating transformations through reflection and introspection (Klieger and Oster‐Levinz [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref49">21</reflink>]; OECD [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref50">30</reflink>]). Teachers actively transform the classroom environment and learning culture, utilizing new thinking and technology to bring about changes in the curriculum. They systematically guide students to apply interdisciplinary knowledge, fostering interdisciplinary literacy (Anagün [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref51">2</reflink>]; Vansteenkiste et al. [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref52">39</reflink>]). Interdisciplinary learning satisfies students' diverse pursuit of knowledge, but simultaneously, it brings about a qualitative change in the teacher's role—from being a transmitter of knowledge to becoming a wise guide (Gaspersz [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref53">12</reflink>]; Halsey et al. [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref54">16</reflink>]).</p> <p>Reviewing teacher role studies, there are diverse discourses on the teacher's role based on different dimensions. Some emphasize the development of a professional role from the perspective of curriculum development (Chen [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref55">5</reflink>]; Newmann et al. [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref56">28</reflink>]; Stenhouse [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref57">37</reflink>]). Others focus on curriculum consciousness (Giroux [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref58">13</reflink>]; Huang [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref59">18</reflink>]) and the dimension of latent curriculum (Ko et al. [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref60">22</reflink>]; Noddings [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref61">29</reflink>]). Additionally, there is a strong emphasis on the teacher's agency and reflexivity within the curriculum (Calvert [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref62">4</reflink>]; Luyten and Bazo [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref63">23</reflink>]; Zaragoza et al. [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref64">42</reflink>]). The varied directions contribute to different perspectives on the teacher's role. Some scholars have delved into the micro‐level, focusing on teacher learning and the psychological changes reflected in their reflections during action. For instance, Nadelson et al. ([<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref65">27</reflink>]) encouraged teachers to challenge low‐structured curriculum designs and adopt novel teaching methods. In this curriculum and teaching orientation, teachers need to have confidence in facing uncertainty and a willingness to take risks. Teacher participation in interdisciplinary integrated teaching can be beneficial for their growth mindset, which is related to the concept of lifelong learning (Özmen et al. [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref66">31</reflink>]; Zaragoza et al. [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref67">42</reflink>]). In the context of interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary integration in cross‐disciplinary courses, Chen ([<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref68">6</reflink>]) asserted that teachers play the roles of catalysts and guides, and are required to serve not only as experts but also as polymaths, leading students toward interdisciplinary development. Thus, this study conceptualized and theorized the roles of teachers in interdisciplinary contexts, categorizing them into roles such as interdisciplinary curriculum development, interdisciplinary learning expansion, and interdisciplinary professional development. The conceptual framework and rationale for this categorization are explained as follows.</p> <hd id="AN0187257404-6">The Role of Interdisciplinary Curriculum Development</hd> <p>The role of teachers in the development of an interdisciplinary curriculum implies their ability to discern global changes, recognize the significance of an interdisciplinary curriculum, and integrate the spirit, content, and processes of interdisciplinary learning into curriculum development (Özmen et al. [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref69">31</reflink>]). Teachers, as designers of an interdisciplinary curriculum, achieve this through systematic interdisciplinary curriculum design, guiding students to gain practical or collaborative experiences with an interdisciplinary perspective (Darling‐Hammond et al. [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref70">7</reflink>]; Drake and Reid [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref71">9</reflink>]; Ministry of Education [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref72">25</reflink>]). Additionally, teachers, as practitioners of interdisciplinary teaching, consider interdisciplinary curriculum design philosophies, engage in understanding, reflection, and context connection, and conduct interdisciplinary teaching activities (Anagün [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref73">2</reflink>]; Mansilla [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref74">24</reflink>]). Furthermore, teachers play a crucial role as assessors in designing and implementing interdisciplinary assessments, understanding students' learning performance, and making timely adjustments to the curriculum based on assessment results, thus providing interdisciplinary support to students (Ko et al. [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref75">22</reflink>]; García Torres [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref76">11</reflink>]).</p> <p>Moreover, in this ever‐evolving technological era, research on the effective integration of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) into subject teaching has proliferated. Teachers must position themselves as adept users of interdisciplinary technological resources, judiciously incorporating computers and technological materials as learning aids for students, enriching instructional design, eliciting student motivation, and thereby enhancing their learning performance (Karaseva [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref77">20</reflink>]; OECD [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref78">30</reflink>]; Weston and Bridget [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref79">40</reflink>]). Ultimately, by initiating learning with real‐world challenges, designing interdisciplinary learning scenarios, and offering support for students to investigate and utilize knowledge, alongside facilitating an environment conducive to learning from failure, educators transform into architects of interdisciplinary learning spaces that cultivate profound understanding. Within this framework, the interdisciplinary curriculum and pedagogy emerge as a creative nexus, merging diverse fields, with educators acting as the architects who craft these enriching interdisciplinary educational landscapes (Drake and Reid [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref80">9</reflink>]; OECD [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref81">30</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0187257404-7">The Role of Interdiciplinary Learning Expansion</hd> <p>The role of teachers in promoting interdisciplinary learning expansion implies a continuous process of reflection and guidance for students in real‐life situations (Rao et al. [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref82">33</reflink>]). Teachers must provide appropriate scaffolding, guiding students to apply their existing knowledge and skills from different disciplines to solve real‐world problems, assisting them in becoming self‐organized learners. Teachers guide students in the application of knowledge and skills from various domains through interdisciplinary themes, projects, or issue‐based learning, serving as facilitators of students' interdisciplinary learning (Calvert [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref83">4</reflink>]; Chen [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref84">6</reflink>]; Halsey et al. [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref85">16</reflink>]). Furthermore, teachers offer suitable scaffolding for a systematic interdisciplinary learning process, fostering and sustaining students' motivation through internal reinforcement, encouraging them to apply what they have learned in real‐life situations. In this capacity, teachers become promoters of students' interdisciplinary learning (Anagün [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref86">2</reflink>]; Chen [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref87">5</reflink>]; García Torres [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref88">11</reflink>]). Additionally, teachers need to understand the students' psychological needs for learning, guiding and supporting them in a timely fashion to help them achieve the learning objectives of interdisciplinary courses, serving as coaches for their interdisciplinary learning (Sahlberg [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref89">36</reflink>]).</p> <p>By situating education within the fabric of societal life, students develop a pragmatic grasp of their knowledge and skills, acknowledging the confines and structures shaping their viewpoints or technical proficiencies. This recognition encourages them to reflect on ways to augment their capabilities, fostering a deeper introspection on personal growth and the application of their learning in broader societal contexts (Halsey et al. [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref90">16</reflink>]).</p> <p>To this end, teachers must enrich their diverse interdisciplinary professional knowledge and skills to provide immediate and effective support to students at any time (Huang [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref91">17</reflink>]; Révai and Guerriero [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref92">34</reflink>]; García Torres [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref93">11</reflink>]). By integrating various perspectives from different domains, teachers guide students to critically reflect on the learning process and outcomes in a timely manner, fostering the development of their literacy in effectively understanding and integrating different knowledge systems, thereby becoming feedback providers for their interdisciplinary learning (Huang [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref94">17</reflink>]; Ministry of Education [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref95">25</reflink>]; Sahlberg [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref96">36</reflink>]). Lastly, when students encounter challenges during their interdisciplinary learning, teachers need to comprehend and analyze their learning situations, guiding them to clarify problems and effectively overcome difficulties, facilitating meaningful learning. In this scenario, teachers act as diagnosticians of students' interdisciplinary learning challenges (Anagün [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref97">2</reflink>]; Chen [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref98">6</reflink>]; Newmann et al. [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref99">28</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0187257404-8">The Role of Interdisciplinary Professional Development</hd> <p>The development of TIRP is influenced not only by external societal contexts and resource systems, but also by the internal needs of teachers, their individual growth motivations, and professional development within the teacher community (Darling‐Hammond et al. [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref100">7</reflink>]; Vansteenkiste et al. [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref101">39</reflink>]). Judy and Theresa ([<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref102">19</reflink>]) found that when teachers perceive leaders as possessing professional knowledge and being trustworthy, they are more likely to embrace an open attitude toward reform. It is noteworthy that when teachers perceive a discrepancy between what falls within their role as teachers and what administrative agency requires them to do, or when their professional autonomy is questioned, the energy for teacher‐led change may diminish (Brady and Wilson [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref103">3</reflink>]; Tao et al. [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref104">38</reflink>]). The role of teachers in interdisciplinary professional development implies a proactive engagement where teachers consciously participate in interdisciplinary learning and collaboration. This involves connecting the personal, interpersonal, and societal aspects, continuously transforming to drive change and leveraging their influence as teachers. Teachers willingly become supporters of each other, fostering a trusting environment of mutual learning and collaboration. Within this atmosphere, teachers explore the essence of an interdisciplinary curriculum and teaching, engaging in collective learning with teachers from different fields, thus becoming learners in interdisciplinary education (Ko et al. [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref105">22</reflink>]; Mansilla [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref106">24</reflink>]).</p> <p>Furthermore, driven by self‐efficacy, teachers autonomously apply, create, and share interdisciplinary knowledge, transforming into interdisciplinary knowledge workers (Nadelson et al. [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref107">27</reflink>]; Tao et al. [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref108">38</reflink>]). In addition, teachers contribute their experiences within teams, genuinely and effectively guiding fellow teachers in understanding and applying interdisciplinary concepts, thus becoming promoters of interdisciplinary professionalism (Brady and Wilson [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref109">3</reflink>]; Chen [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref110">5</reflink>]). Moreover, teachers engage in interdisciplinary professional communities, collaborate with other schools or institutions, form teaching partnerships, and position themselves as interdisciplinary team collaborators for more effective professional growth (Dirsa et al. [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref111">8</reflink>]; Huang [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref112">17</reflink>]; Ko et al. [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref113">22</reflink>]). Finally, amidst climate change, complex international politics, and the transformative impact of digital intelligence technology, teachers must remain vigilant about global and societal issues. They lead students in exploring and analyzing interdisciplinary topics, engaging in practical societal participation, and embodying the role of interdisciplinary teaching practitioners (Brady and Wilson [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref114">3</reflink>]; Nadelson et al. [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref115">27</reflink>]; Révai and Guerriero [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref116">34</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0187257404-9">Methods</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0187257404-10">Research Process and Data Analysis</hd> <p>The construction of TIRPS began with a review of relevant literature, supplemented by data obtained from interviews with 18 junior high and elementary school teachers from schools that implemented interdisciplinary courses under the new curriculum in Taiwan. Expert content validity and exploratory factor analysis (EFA) were employed to check the construction of scale items. Subsequently, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was utilized to verify the stability of the measurement model during the formal scale testing. Criterion‐related validity was examined through criterion‐related validity checks. Finally, the Importance‐Performance Analysis (IPA) was applied to explore the prioritization of TIRP attributes and their performance. The research process is illustrated in Figure 1.</p> <p> <img src="https://imageserver.ebscohost.com/img/embimages/rdk/PIS/01sep25/pits23529-fig-0001.jpg?ephost1=dGJyMNXb4kSepq84yOvqOLCmsE6epq5Srqa4SK6WxWXS" alt="pits23529-fig-0001.jpg" title="1 Research process." /> </p> <p></p> <hd id="AN0187257404-12">Participants</hd> <p>This study invited junior high and elementary school teachers actively involved in the interdisciplinary curriculum development for pilot testing and formal questionnaire surveys. The pilot testing/pre‐test aimed to assess the quality of the self‐developed questionnaire/scale, refine its design, identify potential flaws, and establish its preliminary validity (Reynolds et al. [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref117">35</reflink>]). In Curriculum Guidelines, there is an expectation for school teachers to establish a coherent connection in the vertical alignment of the curriculum and intricately design teaching content. Emphasizing interdisciplinary courses, the curriculum aims to facilitate multidimensional learning, cultivating students' literacy. Therefore, this study selected junior high and elementary school teachers as the research subjects. The purposive sampling method was employed for the pretest, and a simple random sampling method was utilized for the formal questionnaire survey. The sample sizes for the pretest and formal questionnaire surveys are detailed in Table 1.</p> <p>1 Table The sample sizes for the pretest and formal questionnaire.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr valign="bottom"><th>Research subjects</th><th>School code</th><th>Distribution quantity</th><th>Collection quantity</th><th>Invalid samples</th><th>Collected samples</th><th>Recovery rate (%)</th></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td>the pretest questionnaire</td><td>E 1‐A</td><td>130</td><td>122</td><td>11</td><td>111</td><td>85.38</td></tr><tr><td align="center">E 1‐B</td></tr><tr><td align="center">E 1‐C</td></tr><tr><td align="center">E 1‐D</td></tr><tr><td align="center">JH 1‐D</td></tr><tr><td align="center">JH 1‐E</td></tr><tr><td>the formal questionnaire</td><td>E 5‐A</td><td>525</td><td>507</td><td>1</td><td>506</td><td>91.17</td></tr><tr><td align="center">JH 5‐A</td></tr><tr><td align="center">E 4‐B</td></tr><tr><td align="center">JH 4‐B</td></tr><tr><td align="center">E 6‐C</td></tr><tr><td align="center">JH 4‐C</td></tr><tr><td align="center">E 5‐D</td></tr><tr><td align="center">JH 5‐D</td></tr><tr><td align="center">E 5‐E</td></tr><tr><td align="center">JH 5‐E</td></tr><tr><td align="center">E 4‐F</td></tr><tr><td align="center">JH 4‐F</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>1 <emph>Note:</emph> The school code suffix represents the county, and the number indicates the number of schools. For example, E1‐A means one elementary school in County A.</p> <p>2 Abbreviations: E, Elementary school; JH, Junior high school.</p> <hd id="AN0187257404-13">Research Tools</hd> <p>The developed TIRPS focuses on three dimensions of teachers' interdisciplinary roles: "interdisciplinary curriculum development," "interdisciplinary learning expansion," and "interdisciplinary professional development." It comprises 18 items. Ten experts specializing in curriculum development, educational reform, teacher professionalism, as well as educational and learning psychology, were invited to conduct an expert validity assessment. Their feedback on the initial draft of TIRPS was collected and used to make revisions, ensuring the questionnaire's construction integrated both theoretical perspectives and practical considerations.</p> <p>Subsequently, following the suggestions, the preliminary questionnaire was developed, adopting a Likert 5‐point scale for scoring. The analysis method employed exploratory factor analysis. The internal consistency Cronbach's α coefficients for the roles of "interdisciplinary curriculum development," "interdisciplinary learning expansion," and "interdisciplinary professional development," and the overall scale were 0.918, 0.931, 0.927, and 0.966, respectively. After eliminating questions 5, 7, and 13 that did not meet the standard, the Cronbach's α coefficients for the roles of "interdisciplinary curriculum development," "interdisciplinary learning expansion," and "interdisciplinary professional development," and the overall scale were 0.901, 0.923, 0.927, and 0.960, respectively. This indicates a very high level of internal consistency for the questionnaire in this study. The selected items established TIRPS, which then underwent further refinement to become the "Importance and Performance Questionnaire for TIRP," designated for formal evaluation as presented in Table 2.</p> <p>2 Table Example of the questionnaire on the importance and performance levels of TIRPn.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr valign="bottom"><th align="left">Importance</th><th>Item</th><th align="center">Performance Levels</th></tr><tr valign="bottom"><th align="left">Not important ↔ Important</th><th align="center">Not corresponding ↔ Corresponding</th></tr><tr valign="bottom"><th>1</th><th>2</th><th>3</th><th>4</th><th>5</th><th>1</th><th>2</th><th>3</th><th>4</th><th>5</th></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td>□</td><td>□</td><td>□</td><td>□</td><td>□</td><td>Interdisciplinary Curriculum Designer: Capable of designing courses that guide students in developing interdisciplinary perspectives, experiences, collaboration, and practical skills.</td><td>□</td><td>□</td><td>□</td><td>□</td><td>□</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <hd id="AN0187257404-14">Findings and Discussion</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0187257404-15">Construction of the Interdisciplinary Role Perception Questionnaire for Elementary and Junior...</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0187257404-16">Analysis of the Results of the Expert Appropriateness Questionnaire</hd> <p>In this study, a survey of expert appropriateness was conducted with 10 education‐related scholars. The findings revealed that the combined percentage of "appropriate" and "appropriately revised" options for all aspects of TIRP exceeded 80%. Therefore, all options were retained, as shown in Table 3.</p> <p>3 Table Expert appropriateness evaluation results for the construction of the interdisciplinary role perception questionnaire.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr valign="bottom"><th>Dimensions</th><th>Items</th><th align="center">Appropriateness</th></tr><tr valign="bottom"><th align="center">Appropriate</th><th>Appropriately revised</th><th>Inappropriate</th><th>Appropriate and Appropriately revised (%)</th></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td>The role of interdisciplinary curriculum development</td><td>1. Interdisciplinary Curriculum Designer: Capable of designing courses that guide students in developing interdisciplinary perspectives, experiences, collaboration, and practical skills.</td><td>7</td><td>3</td><td>0</td><td>100</td></tr><tr><td align="center">2. Interdisciplinary Teaching Practitioner: Understands, reflects, and connects contextual elements to engage in interdisciplinary teaching activities.</td><td>6</td><td>4</td><td>0</td><td>100</td></tr><tr><td align="center">3. Interdisciplinary multiple Assessor: Designs and implements multiple assessments for interdisciplinary learning, understanding students' performance in the learning process and outcomes.</td><td>7</td><td>3</td><td>0</td><td>100</td></tr><tr><td align="center">4. Interdisciplinary Learning Environment Creator: Creates interdisciplinary learning environments, including spaces, facilities, and contextual arrangements, fostering an atmosphere that encourages experimentation and exploration across disciplines, while allowing for failures as part of the learning process.</td><td>5</td><td>5</td><td>0</td><td>100</td></tr><tr><td align="center">5. Learning Resources Integrator: Integrates human, material, and institutional resources both within and outside the school to support students' interdisciplinary learning development.</td><td>7</td><td>3</td><td>0</td><td>100</td></tr><tr><td align="center">6. Technology‐Mediated Learning Facilitator: Effectively utilizes computer technology and related media to create diverse experiences, aiding students in their learning development and enhancing learning outcomes.</td><td>4</td><td>6</td><td>0</td><td>100</td></tr><tr><td align="center">7. Curriculum Evaluator: Focuses on student learning development, examining the relationship between curriculum design, learning processes, and outcomes, with a commitment to reflection and improvement.</td><td>5</td><td>5</td><td>0</td><td>100</td></tr><tr><td>The role of interdisciplinary learning expansion</td><td>8. Guide of Interdisciplinary Learning: Guides students in utilizing knowledge and skills from various domains for interdisciplinary thematic or project‐based learning.</td><td>8</td><td>2</td><td>0</td><td>100</td></tr><tr><td align="center">9. Promoter of Interdisciplinary Learning: Sparks and sustains student motivation, provides scaffolding for encouragement, and helps students experience and apply interdisciplinary learning.</td><td>4</td><td>6</td><td>0</td><td>100</td></tr><tr><td align="center">10. Coach of Interdisciplinary Learning: Understands students' needs, accompanies and supports them, assisting in achieving learning objectives within interdisciplinary themes/projects.</td><td>6</td><td>4</td><td>0</td><td>100</td></tr><tr><td align="center">11. Feedback Provider for Interdisciplinary Learning: Offers timely feedback on the learning process and outcomes from diverse disciplinary perspectives in the context of interdisciplinary learning.</td><td>6</td><td>4</td><td>0</td><td>100</td></tr><tr><td align="center">12. Diagnostician of Interdisciplinary Learning Challenges: Assists students in identifying and overcoming learning challenges related to interdisciplinary or disciplinary aspects within interdisciplinary projects.</td><td>3</td><td>6</td><td>1</td><td>90</td></tr><tr><td align="center">13. Consultant for Interdisciplinary Learning Issues: Offers discussion and consultation when students encounter psychological, social interaction, and domain‐specific or interdisciplinary learning issues.</td><td>4</td><td>6</td><td>0</td><td>100</td></tr><tr><td>The role of interdisciplinary professional development</td><td>14. Learner of Interdisciplinarity: Stays current, explores the essence of interdisciplinarity, and engages in collaborative learning with different domains and teacher communities.</td><td>5</td><td>5</td><td>0</td><td>100</td></tr><tr><td align="center">15. Interdisciplinary Knowledge Worker: Teachers autonomously apply, create, and disseminate interdisciplinary knowledge.</td><td>4</td><td>5</td><td>1</td><td>90</td></tr><tr><td align="center">16. Interdisciplinary Professional Facilitator: Teachers contribute their experiences and expertise within the teacher team, fostering understanding and application of interdisciplinary approaches.</td><td>7</td><td>3</td><td>0</td><td>100</td></tr><tr><td align="center">17. Interdisciplinary Team Collaborator: Teachers can form interdisciplinary professional communities and collaborate with external societal organizations.</td><td>3</td><td>7</td><td>0</td><td>100</td></tr><tr><td align="center">18. Interdisciplinary Practitioner: Teachers can address global and societal issues, leading students to engage in societal participation through interdisciplinary projects.</td><td>4</td><td>6</td><td>0</td><td>100</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <hd id="AN0187257404-17">Exploratory Factor Analysis of the Teachers' Interdisciplinary Roles Questionnaire Preliminar...</hd> <p>Using the preliminary survey data for analysis, the KMO value was found to be 0.928, meeting the criteria; thus, exploratory factor analysis was conducted. Principal component analysis was employed using the Kaiser normalization and the optimal oblique rotation method. In the original questionnaire design, the structure of the questionnaire's dimensions was determined based on the theory, leading to a stratified factor analysis. The results are presented in Table 4.</p> <p>4 Table Factor analysis summary table for teachers' interdisciplinary roles perceptions.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><tbody valign="top"><tr><td><graphic href="" /></td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>In light of the factor loadings below 0.4 for item 5, failing to meet the standard, and the factor loadings spanning two components for items 7 and 13, indicating the inclusion of multiple sub‐constructs, these items were removed. Consequently, Factor 1 comprises items 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12, with factor loadings ranging from 0.552 to 0.930; Factor 2 includes items 14, 15, 16, 17, and 18, with factor loadings between 0.687 and 0.853; and Factor 3 involves items 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6, with factor loadings ranging from 0.682 to 0.813. After item deletion, the total explained variance increased from 74.50% to 76.95%, resulting in a final set of 15 items forming the TIRPS.</p> <hd id="AN0187257404-18">Confirmatory Factor Analysis of TIRPS</hd> <p>Using the TIRPS as the observed variable indicators, a confirmatory factor analysis was conducted, as shown in Figure 2. The fit indices for the scale model are presented in Table 5, with most fit measures being quite satisfactory, except for the AGFI value, which is acceptable. After the confirmatory factor analysis, the standardized factor loadings for the 15 items all exceeded 0.5 but did not surpass 0.95, with residuals being positive and significant, indicating no violations of estimation. The composite reliabilities of the scale were 0.872, 0.887, and 0.899 for each dimension, all surpassing the standard of 0.7. The average variance extracted values were 0.582, 0.612, and 0.641, all exceeding the 0.5 standard, demonstrating that the scale met the criteria for convergent validity. Additionally, the criterion‐related validity between this formal scale and the pilot scale was 0.805 (<emph>p</emph> < 0.001), indicating good criterion‐related validity and suggesting its reference value.</p> <p> <img src="https://imageserver.ebscohost.com/img/embimages/rdk/PIS/01sep25/pits23529-fig-0002.jpg?ephost1=dGJyMNXb4kSepq84yOvqOLCmsE6epq5Srqa4SK6WxWXS" alt="pits23529-fig-0002.jpg" title="2 The model of the Teachers' Interdisciplinary Role Perception Scale (TIRPS)." /> </p> <p></p> <p>5 Table Summary table of the overall model fit test results for the Teachers' Interdisciplinary Role Perception Scale (TIRPS).</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr valign="bottom"><th>Indicator</th><th>Importance of teachers' interdisciplinary roles</th><th>Model fit assessment</th></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td>df</td><td>87</td><td>Reference</td></tr><tr><td>χ2/df (2< value < 5)</td><td>3.788</td><td>Excellent</td></tr><tr><td>Absolute Fit Index</td><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>χ2 (p > 0.05)</td><td>329.555</td><td>Reference</td></tr><tr><td>GFI( > 0.90)</td><td>.920</td><td>Excellent</td></tr><tr><td>AGFI( > 0.90)</td><td>.880</td><td>Fair</td></tr><tr><td>RMR( < 0.05)</td><td>.018</td><td>Excellent</td></tr><tr><td>SRMR( < 0.05)</td><td>.038</td><td>Excellent</td></tr><tr><td>RMSEA( < 0.08)</td><td>.074</td><td>Excellent</td></tr><tr><td>Incremental Fit Index</td><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>NFI > 0.90</td><td>.938</td><td>Excellent</td></tr><tr><td>RFI > 0.90</td><td>.925</td><td>Excellent</td></tr><tr><td>IFI > 0.90</td><td>.954</td><td>Excellent</td></tr><tr><td>TLI > 0.90</td><td>.944</td><td>Excellent</td></tr><tr><td>CFI > 0.90</td><td>.954</td><td>Excellent</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Parsimony fit index</td><td /></tr><tr><td>PGFI > 0.5</td><td>.664</td><td>Excellent</td></tr><tr><td>PNFI > 0.5</td><td>.777</td><td>Excellent</td></tr><tr><td>PCFI > 0.5</td><td>.790</td><td>Excellent</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <hd id="AN0187257404-20">Analysis of the Current Status of Importance and Performance of TIRP in Elementary and Junior...</hd> <p>In summary, the average for each dimension of TIRP (as shown in Table 6) are all above 3.7. The average for the importance of each dimension is higher than the performance scores. The examination of the averages, rankings, and differences in importance and performance for each item (as presented in Table 7) reveals significant differences among all 15 items on the scale. Consequently, the subsequent Importance‐Performance Analysis (IPA) aims to explore issues in the educational context where: (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref118">1</reflink>) Teachers perceive high importance but relatively low performance and consider it a priority for improvement. (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref119">2</reflink>) Teachers perceive low importance but exhibit high performance due to educational trends or policy requirements.</p> <p>6 Table The averages and rankings of importance and performance levels for teachers' interdisciplinary role dimensions.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr valign="bottom"><th>Dimensions</th><th>Importance</th><th align="center">Performance levels</th></tr><tr valign="bottom"><th>Averages</th><th>Rankings</th><th>Averages</th><th>Rankings</th></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td>The role of interdisciplinary curriculum development</td><td>4.299</td><td>1</td><td>3.844</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>The role of interdisciplinary learning expansion</td><td>4.297</td><td>2</td><td>3.832</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>The role of interdisciplinary professional development</td><td>4.200</td><td>3</td><td>3.734</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>Overall</td><td>4.265</td><td /><td>3.803</td><td /></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>7 Table The averages, rankings, and discrepancy analysis of importance and performance levels for teachers' interdisciplinary role items (N = 506).</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr valign="bottom"><th>Dimensions</th><th>Items</th><th>Importance</th><th align="center">Performance levels</th><th align="center">Discrepancy analysis</th></tr><tr valign="bottom"><th>Averages</th><th>Rankings</th><th>Averages</th><th>Rankings</th><th>Average deviation (A.D.)</th><th><italic>t value</italic></th></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td>The role of interdisciplinary curriculum development</td><td>1</td><td>Interdisciplinary curriculum designer</td><td>4.417</td><td>1</td><td>3.840</td><td>6</td><td>0.575<ext-link href="**" /></td><td>15.963</td></tr><tr><td align="center">2</td><td>Interdisciplinary teaching practitioner</td><td>4.387</td><td>2</td><td>3.900</td><td>2</td><td>0.484<ext-link href="**" /></td><td>14.410</td></tr><tr><td align="center">3</td><td>Interdisciplinary multiple assessor</td><td>4.273</td><td>8</td><td>3.770</td><td>9</td><td>0.506<ext-link href="**" /></td><td>13.396</td></tr><tr><td align="center">4</td><td>Interdisciplinary learning environment creator</td><td>4.308</td><td>5</td><td>3.860</td><td>4</td><td>0.451<ext-link href="**" /></td><td>12.153</td></tr><tr><td align="center">5</td><td>Technology‐mediated learning facilitator</td><td>4.107</td><td>14</td><td>3.850</td><td>5</td><td>0.261<ext-link href="**" /></td><td>7.010</td></tr><tr><td>The role of interdisciplinary learning expansion</td><td>6</td><td>Guide of interdisciplinary learning</td><td>4.358</td><td>4</td><td>3.840</td><td>6</td><td>0.518<ext-link href="**" /></td><td>13.954</td></tr><tr><td align="center">7</td><td>Promoter of interdisciplinary learning</td><td>4.376</td><td>3</td><td>3.890</td><td>3</td><td>0.490<ext-link href="**" /></td><td>13.467</td></tr><tr><td align="center">8</td><td>Coach of interdisciplinary learning</td><td>4.291</td><td>7</td><td>3.930</td><td>1</td><td>0.370<ext-link href="**" /></td><td>9.875</td></tr><tr><td align="center">9</td><td>Feedback provider for interdisciplinary learning</td><td>4.235</td><td>10</td><td>3.770</td><td>9</td><td>0.475<ext-link href="**" /></td><td>13.132</td></tr><tr><td align="center">10</td><td>Diagnostician of interdisciplinary learning challenges</td><td>4.223</td><td>11</td><td>3.730</td><td>14</td><td>0.508<ext-link href="**" /></td><td>12.912</td></tr><tr><td>The role of interdisciplinary professional development</td><td>11</td><td>Learner of interdisciplinarity</td><td>4.312</td><td>5</td><td>3.820</td><td>8</td><td>0.508<ext-link href="**" /></td><td>13.714</td></tr><tr><td align="center">12</td><td>Interdisciplinary knowledge worker</td><td>4.193</td><td>13</td><td>3.760</td><td>11</td><td>0.453<ext-link href="**" /></td><td>12.663</td></tr><tr><td align="center">13</td><td>Interdisciplinary professional facilitator</td><td>4.202</td><td>12</td><td>3.760</td><td>11</td><td>0.465<ext-link href="**" /></td><td>12.416</td></tr><tr><td align="center">14</td><td>Interdisciplinary team collaborator</td><td>4.042</td><td>15</td><td>3.590</td><td>15</td><td>0.469<ext-link href="**" /></td><td>12.126</td></tr><tr><td align="center">15</td><td>Interdisciplinary practitioner</td><td>4.251</td><td>9</td><td>3.740</td><td>13</td><td>0.530<ext-link href="**" /></td><td>14.392</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>3 ** Statistically Significant Results.</p> <p>Combining the findings from Tables 6 and 7, it is observed that the overall importance and performance levels of "the role of interdisciplinary curriculum development" are the highest. Specifically, teachers perceive themselves as practitioners of interdisciplinary teaching and curriculum designers. They engage in reflection by understanding interdisciplinary teaching concepts and connecting contextual elements through curriculum design, guiding students through actual interdisciplinary learning activities. This study highlights the increasing expectations for teachers' instructional quality in society. Teachers should continuously enhance their content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge, applying the acquired professional learning to their teaching practices (Darling‐Hammond et al. [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref120">7</reflink>]; OECD [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref121">30</reflink>]; Zaragoza et al. [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref122">42</reflink>]).</p> <p>Following that is "the role of interdisciplinary learning expansion," where the importance and performance of teachers in the role of "promoter of interdisciplinary learning" are both ranked third. This aligns with the learning performance of Taiwanese students in international assessments. It indicates that teachers with richer knowledge in interdisciplinary pedagogy have a deeper understanding of students' learning characteristics. They can effectively utilize various interdisciplinary teaching representations to stimulate students' motivation and exploration interests, guiding them to cultivate interdisciplinary thinking skills (Anagün [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref123">2</reflink>]; García Torres [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref124">11</reflink>]).</p> <p>The overall importance and performance of "the role of interdisciplinary professional development" are the lowest. Specifically, contributions to the teacher team in terms of experience and expertise, independent creation, application, and dissemination of interdisciplinary knowledge, concern for global and societal issues, and leading students in social participation all exhibit relatively low importance and performance levels. This finding aligns with the results of the TALIS survey in Taiwan in 2018, where teachers at the elementary and junior high school levels perceived obstacles to professional development due to factors such as busy work schedules, family responsibilities, and a lack of incentives (Klieger and Oster‐Levinz [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref125">21</reflink>]; Ko et al. [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref126">22</reflink>]). While collaborative professional development among teachers and peers has gained attention in recent years, external factors such as inappropriate workshop timing, content of professional development courses, guidance methods, and quality, as well as internal individual factors like intrinsic motivation and self‐efficacy, can influence the perceived performance of teacher's interdisciplinary professional development role (Calvert [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref127">4</reflink>]; Chen [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref128">5</reflink>]; Huang [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref129">17</reflink>]). This outcome also affects teachers' willingness to participate in interdisciplinary professional communities or collaborate with external organizations. Therefore, the importance and performance of the "Interdisciplinary Team Collaborator" dimension rank lowest among all items, reflecting a potential contradiction with the trend of global development where problem‐solving is gradually shifting from individual efforts towards community collaboration. This warrants continued attention.</p> <hd id="AN0187257404-21">Analysis of the Difference in Importance and Performance of TIRP</hd> <p>This study utilized IPA to depict the averages of importance and performance of TIRP on a two‐dimensional matrix. According to Figure 3, teachers who participated in the pilot implementation of the new curriculum and conducted interdisciplinary courses on‐site had an average importance score of 4.2649 and an average performance score of 3.8033, with coordinates at (4.2649, 3.8033). Integrating the results from Figure 3, the role labeled as "3. Interdisciplinary Multiple Assessor" emerged as a priority for improvement. This indicates that teachers recognize the importance of designing and implementing multiple assessments in interdisciplinary contexts, understanding students' learning processes and outcomes. However, they find it relatively challenging to effectively implement assessments to enhance student learning. Therefore, it is recommended that both the government and schools prioritize and contemplate how to assist teachers in improving the practical implementation of this aspect.</p> <p> <img src="https://imageserver.ebscohost.com/img/embimages/rdk/PIS/01sep25/pits23529-fig-0003.jpg?ephost1=dGJyMNXb4kSepq84yOvqOLCmsE6epq5Srqa4SK6WxWXS" alt="pits23529-fig-0003.jpg" title="3 Analysis chart of importance and performance levels of interdisciplinary role perception." /> </p> <p></p> <p>The high importance placed on interdisciplinary multiple assessments resonates with many research findings. Teachers play an active role in designing interdisciplinary curricula, reflecting on teaching successes and challenges, understanding students' learning processes, and diagnosing learning difficulties based on assessment results. Effectively implementing assessments has become a focal point for many teachers' professional development (Chen [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref130">5</reflink>]; Glazier et al. [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref131">14</reflink>]; Luyten and Bazo [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref132">23</reflink>]). The lower performance level in teachers' interdisciplinary multiple assessments aligns with the argument made by Newmann et al. ([<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref133">28</reflink>]), which indicated that various professional development programs that aim to promote school innovation do not consistently emphasize the development of teaching and assessment, leaving teachers with insufficient time to apply what they have learned. This suggests that teachers, constrained by time or professional expertise, may face challenges in developing and applying multiple assessment tools in their teaching practices (Luyten and Bazo [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref134">23</reflink>]; Ramberg [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref135">32</reflink>]).</p> <p>In recent years, technological pedagogical content knowledge has become a focal point of policy development (Abramczyk and Jurkowski [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref136">1</reflink>]; OECD [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref137">30</reflink>]). Numerous studies also emphasize the importance of teachers effectively utilizing computer technology and related media to enrich instructional design, thereby enhancing student motivation and effectiveness in learning (Karaseva [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref138">20</reflink>]; Tao et al. [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref139">38</reflink>]; Weston and Bridget [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref140">40</reflink>]). Furthermore, this study found that "5. Technology‐Mediated Learning Facilitator" (see Figure 3) is positioned in the second quadrant in the IPA analysis, indicating potential overemphasis. In the importance ranking (14th) and actual performance ranking (5th) according to Table 7, this role exhibits a discrepancy. Analysis suggests that teachers, functioning in the role of "educators," tend to continuously engage in professional development to enhance their teaching capabilities in response to educational innovations and the deepening of educational knowledge. This behavior is a tendency and a manifestation of the structured and internalized role of teachers (Chen [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref141">6</reflink>]).</p> <p>Having integrated technology into curriculum and teaching practices for many years, the flexible use of technology media to enhance instructional effectiveness has become an active competence for modern educators (Calvert [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref142">4</reflink>]; Karaseva [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref143">20</reflink>]). In this context, many studies have discovered that teachers systematically internalize strategies for the use of technology media within the context of interdisciplinary curriculum design and teaching, fostering students' technological literacy. This finding aligns with both domestic and international research and current global educational trends. However, it contrasts with the TALIS international survey results, where Taiwanese teachers (randomly sampled across Taiwan) showed relatively lower effectiveness in integrating technology into teaching compared to international results (Ko et al. [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref144">22</reflink>]). This discrepancy may require concurrent calibration and might reflect the positive influence of pre‐existing resources and guidance on teachers. Continuous observation is recommended for further insights.</p> <hd id="AN0187257404-23">Conclusion and Limitations</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0187257404-24">Conclusion</hd> <p>This study aimed to construct an assessment tool for TIRP. Through empirical investigation, the study sought to gain insights into teachers' performance and application of interdisciplinary roles. The conclusions drawn from the research are as follows:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> 1. This study constructed the TIRPS which includes three dimensions: "the role of interdisciplinary curriculum development," "the role of interdisciplinary learning expansion," and "the role of interdisciplinary professional development." The scale comprises 15 indicators (Cronbach's α = 0.960, CRV = 0.805 (<emph>p</emph> < 0.001)), demonstrating good reliability and validity, making it a suitable tool for future interdisciplinary research.</item> <p></p> <item> 2. Teachers rated the importance and performance level of "the role of interdisciplinary curriculum development" the highest. Among them, teachers' self‐perception as interdisciplinary teaching practitioners and interdisciplinary curriculum designers received higher average scores. This indicates that teachers in Taiwanese primary and junior high schools feel positively about their roles in developing interdisciplinary curriculum content, designing teaching methods, stimulating students' motivation for interdisciplinary learning, and facilitating students' experiences in interdisciplinary learning and knowledge.</item> <p></p> <item> 3. Teachers rated the importance and performance level of "the role of interdisciplinary professional development" lower, especially in roles such as diagnosing difficulties in interdisciplinary learning and being interdisciplinary knowledge workers. This suggests that teachers still need to strengthen their autonomous application of interdisciplinary knowledge in interdisciplinary courses and their contribution to interdisciplinary expertise within a team.</item> <p></p> <item> 4. Based on the analysis of importance and performance levels, the "Interdisciplinary Multiple Assessor" scored lower than the overall average in performance but higher than the overall average in importance. This becomes a priority improvement area, signifying that addressing the challenges in the role of "Interdisciplinary Multiple Assessor" should be a focal point for schools and teachers in developing their perception of interdisciplinary roles in the future.</item> </ulist> <hd id="AN0187257404-25">Limitations and Directions for Future Research</hd> <p>In accordance with the conclusions, practical applications for educational policies, school promotion, and future research recommendations are provided as follows:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> 1. This study conducted an initial exploration with teachers without distinguishing between them for comparative analysis, which is a limitation of the study. Subsequent research could expand by including samples with diverse backgrounds to understand the differences in TIRP based on various background variables. Comparative analysis can provide insights into the importance and performance levels of TIRP, serving as a reference for future teacher training and policy planning.</item> <p></p> <item> 2. Faced with the emphasis on dynamic interdisciplinary curriculum design, there is a current focus on flexible, adaptable, and effective multidimensional assessments for diagnosing students' learning difficulties and providing immediate assistance. When formulating relevant policies, the government and administrative departments can allocate more resources to assist teachers in developing interdisciplinary assessment competencies. This may involve initiatives such as inviting collaboration with experts and scholars, establishing interdisciplinary assessment workshops, or investing in material resources, such as utilizing technology platforms to create interdisciplinary assessment scenarios. Encouraging dialogue among teachers from different domains can facilitate the analysis of student learning assessment processes and outcomes, enabling timely responses to student learning needs.</item> <p></p> <item> 3. Schools can contribute to the development of teachers' interdisciplinary competencies by organizing interdisciplinary professional learning sessions and collaborative activities. These initiatives should address forward‐looking and internationally trending learning topics. By providing support for teachers implementing interdisciplinary teaching, schools can foster communities that facilitate the development of both guided and practical professional growth. Through interactive collaboration with peers, teachers can refine their attitudes toward interdisciplinary development and sustain a positive cycle of collaborative exploration, thereby maintaining motivation for interdisciplinary curriculum design and teaching.</item> <p></p> <item> 4. Further research is needed to explore other potential factors influencing TIRP and teaching performance. Factors such as principal leadership, organizational culture, and teachers' agency to gain a comprehensive understanding of the complex dynamics influencing teachers' perceptions and practices in interdisciplinary education.</item> <p></p> <item> 5. This study was confined to investigating teachers' perceptions, without addressing students' views on interdisciplinary learning. This constitutes a limitation, particularly from a school psychology perspective, where understanding students' cognitive, emotional, and motivational responses to interdisciplinary instruction is critical. Future research is encouraged to extend this line of inquiry by incorporating student perspectives to gain a more holistic understanding of interdisciplinary learning environments.</item> </ulist> <hd id="AN0187257404-26">Acknowledgments</hd> <p>This study was funded by a program grant from the National Science and Technology Council: MOST 107‐2410‐H‐007‐041‐SS3‐MY2. We sincerely thank the participants for the insights, accomplishments, and research opportunities enabled by their work. We also appreciate the anonymous reviewers and Editor‐in‐Chief, Professor David McIntosh, for their constructive feedback, which has greatly enriched this study.</p> <hd id="AN0187257404-27">Conflicts of Interest</hd> <p>The authors declare no conflicts of interest.</p> <hd id="AN0187257404-28">Data Availability Statement</hd> <p>The data that support the findings of this study are openly available in DOI at https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/15206807.</p> <ref id="AN0187257404-29"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref39" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Abramczyk, A., and S. Jurkowski. 2020. " Cooperative Learning as an Evidence‐Based Teaching Strategy: What Teachers Know, Believe, and How They Use it." Journal of Education for Teaching 46, no. 3 : 296 – 308. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2020.1733402.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref5" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Anagün, Ş. S. 2018. " Teachers' Perceptions About the Relationship Between 21st Century Skills and Managing Constructivist Learning Environments." International Journal of Instruction 11, no. 4 : 825 – 840. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.11452a.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref103" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Brady, J., and E. Wilson. 2021. " Teacher Wellbeing in England: Teacher Responses to School‐Level Initiatives." Cambridge Journal of Education 51, no. 1 : 45 – 63. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2020.1775789.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref34" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Calvert, L. 2016. Moving From Compliance to Agency: What Teachers Need to Make Professional Learning Work. Learning Forward and NCTAF.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref26" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Chen, M. J. 2019. " Teachers as Curriculum Evaluators: Two Orientations and One Constant." In The Present and Past of Educational Reform: Challenges and Responses edited by J. R. Mao, 327 – 380. Higher Education.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref68" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Chen, P. Y. 2018. " Ideation and Practice of Interdisciplinary Competence‐Based Curriculum Workshop." Journal of Curriculum Studies 13, no. 2 : 21 – 42. (Published in Mandarin).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref1" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Darling‐Hammond, L., L. Flook, C. Cook‐Harvey, B. Barron, and D. Osher. 2020. " Implications for Educational Practice of the Science of Learning and Development." Applied Developmental Science 24, no. 2 : 97 – 140. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888691.2018.1537791.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref11" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Dirsa, A., S. Anggreni BP, C. Diananseri, and I. Setiawan. 2022. " Teacher Role as Professional Educator in School Environment." International Journal of Science Education and Cultural Studies 1, no. 1 : 32 – 41. https://doi.org/10.58291/ijsecs.v1i1.25.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref3" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Drake, S., and J. Reid. 2018. " Integrated Curriculum As an Effective Way to Teach 21st Century Capabilities." Asia Pacific Journal of Educational Research 1, no. 1 : 31 – 50. https://doi.org/10.30777/APJER.2018.1.1.03.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fullan, M., J. Quinn, and J. McEachen. 2018. Deep Learning: Engage the World Change the World. Corwin Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> García Torres, D. 2019. " Distributed Leadership, Professional Collaboration, and Teachers' Job Satisfaction in U.S. Schools." Teaching and Teacher Education 79 : 111 – 123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.12.001.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gaspersz, E. J. 2024. " Influence of Transformational Leadership and Teacher Collaboration on Teachers' Ability in Implementing Interdisciplinary Learning." Academy of Education Journal 15, no. 1 : 718 – 733. https://doi.org/10.47200/aoej.v15i1.2299.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Giroux, H. A. 1988. Teachers as Intellectuals: Toward a Critical Pedagogy of Learning. Bergin & Garvey.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Glazier, J. A., A. Boyd, K. B. Hughes, H. Able, and R. Mallous. 2017. " The Elusive Search for Teacher Collaboration." Journal The New Educator 13, no. 1 : 3 – 21. https://doi.org/10.1080/1547688X.2016.1144841.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hairon, S. 2017. " Action Research in Singapore: Where Are we Now? " Asia‐Pacific Science Education 3 : 5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41029-017-0016-x.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Halsey, A. H., H. Lauder, P. Brown, and A. Stuart Wells. 1997. Education: Culture, Economy and Society. Oxford University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Huang, J. L. 2020. " Teachers as Learning Professionals." In Encyclopedia of Teacher Education, edited by M. Peters. Springer.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Huang, T. 2005. " From 'Role' to 'Self': An Investigation of the Problems and Possibilities of Teacher Change." Bulletin of Educational Research 51, no. 4 : 89 – 116.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Judy, S., and B. Theresa. 2012. " Teachers' Perceptions of the Use of an External Change Agent in School Curriculum Change." Australian Educational Researcher 39, no. 2 : 207 – 220. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-012-0059-7.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Karaseva, A. 2017. " Manifestations of Teacher Professional Agency in Relation to Integration of ICT in Teaching." SOCIETY. INTEGRATION. EDUCATION. Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference 3 : 500 – 514. https://doi.org/10.17770/sie2017vol3.2296.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Klieger, A., and A. Oster‐Levinz. 2015. " The Influence of Teacher Education on Mentor Teachers' Role Perception in Professional Development Schools." Journal of Education for Teaching 41, no. 2 : 115 – 127. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2015.1010873.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ko, H. W., M. L. Chen, J. R. Lee, and K.‐M. Chen. 2019. Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) 2018 Taiwan Report: Elementary, Junior High, & Senior High Educations. National Academy for Educational Research.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Luyten, H., and M. Bazo. 2019. " Transformational Leadership, Professional Learning Communities, Teacher Learning and Learner Centred Teaching Practices: Evidence on Their Interrelations in Mozambican Primary Education." Studies in Educational Evaluation 60 : 14 – 31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2018.11.002.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mansilla, V. B. 2017. " Interdisciplinary Learning: A Cognitive‐Epistemological Foundation." In The Oxford Handbook of Interdisciplinarity edited by R. Frodeman, 261 – 275. Oxford University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ministry of Education. 2014. Curriculum Guidelines of 12‐Year Basic Education: General Principles. Author.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ministry of Education Singapore. (2017). Co‐Curricular Activities. https://data.gov.sg/collections/457/datasets/d_9aba12b5527843afb0b2e8e4ed6ac6bd/view.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nadelson, L. S., A. L. Seifert, and C. Sias. 2015. " To Change or Not to Change: Indicators of K‐12 Teacher Engagement in Innovative Educational Practices." International Journal of Innovation in Education 3 : 45 – 61. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJIIE.2015.074704.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Newmann, F. M., M. B. King, and P. Youngs. 2000. " Professional Development That Addresses School Capacity: Lessons From Urban Elementary Schools." American Journal of Education 108, no. 4 : 259 – 299. https://doi.org/10.1086/444249.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Noddings, N. 2012. " The Caring Relation in Teaching." Oxford Review of Education 38, no. 6 : 771 – 781. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2012.745047.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> OECD 2019. TALIS 2018 Results: Teachers and School Leaders as Lifelong Learners (Volume 1). OECD.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Özmen, K., İ. Dönmez, and S. Gülen. 2025. " Perception of Job Security and Professional Self‐Esteem of Teachers: A Mixed Method Research." Psychology in the Schools 62, no. 1 : 256 – 280. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.23323.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ramberg, M. R. 2014. " What Makes Reform Work? School‐Based Conditions As Predictors of Teachers' Changing Practice after a National Curriculum Reform." International Education Studies 7, no. 6 : 46 – 65. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v7n6p46.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rao, X., X. He, J. Wu, and L. Jiao. 2025. " The Relationship Between Teaching Style and Student Creativity in Primary Schools." Psychology in the Schools, ahead of print, March 12. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.23472.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Révai, N., and S. Guerriero. 2017. " Knowledge Dynamics in the Teaching Profession." In Pedagogical Knowledge and the Changing Nature of the Teaching Profession edited by S. Guerriero, 37 – 71. Organisation for Economic Co‐operation and Development.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Reynolds, N., A. Diamantopoulos, and B. Schlegelmilch. 1993. " Pre‐Testing in Questionnaire Design: A Review of the Literature and Suggestions for Further Research." Market Research Society. Journal. 35, no. 2 : 1 – 11. https://doi.org/10.1177/147078539303500202.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sahlberg, P. 2013. " Teachers as Leaders in Finland." Educational Leadership 71, no. 2 : 36 – 40.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Stenhouse, L. 1972. " Teaching through Small Group Discussion: Formality, Rules and Authority." Cambridge Journal of Education 2, no. 1 : 18 – 24. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764720020103.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tao, Y., Y. Meng, Z. Gao, and X. Yang. 2022. " Perceived Teacher Support, Student Engagement, and Academic Achievement: A Meta‐Analysis." Educational Psychology 42, no. 4 : 401 – 420. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2022.2033168.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Vansteenkiste, M., M. Aelterman, H. Haerens, and B. Soenens. 2019. " Seeking Stability in Stormy Educational Times: A Need‐Based Perspective on (De)Motivating Teaching Grounded in Self‐Determination Theory." Motivation in Education at a Time of Global Change 10 : 53 – 80. https://doi.org/10.1108/S0749-742320190000020004.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Weston, D., and C. Bridget. 2018. Unleashing Great Teaching: The Secrets to the Most Effective Teacher Development. Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ye, P., and X. Xu. 2023. " A Case Study of Interdisciplinary Thematic Learning Curriculum to Cultivate '4C Skills'." Frontiers in Psychology 14 : 1080811. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1080811.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Zaragoza, M. C., J. Díaz‐Gibson, A. F. Caparrós, and S. L. Solé. 2021. " The Teacher of the 21st Century: Professional Competencies in Catalonia Today." Educational Studies 47 : 217 – 237. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2019.1686697.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Mei‐Ju Chen; Chao‐Yu Guo; Li‐Ting Tseng; Ming‐Yi Chiu and Hsuan‐Jui Weng</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author; Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref12"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref16"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref17"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref18"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref20"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref23"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref29"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref31"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref33"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref42"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref43"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref44"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref50"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref54"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref56"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref57"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref58"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref61"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref65"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref79"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref89"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref102"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref117"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref131"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1479925
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Understanding Teachers' Interdisciplinary Role Perceptions: Scale Development and Importance-Performance Analysis
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Mei-Ju+Chen%22">Mei-Ju Chen</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9600-2008">0000-0001-9600-2008</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Chao-Yu+Guo%22">Chao-Yu Guo</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Li-Ting+Tseng%22">Li-Ting Tseng</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Ming-Yi+Chiu%22">Ming-Yi Chiu</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Hsuan-Jui+Weng%22">Hsuan-Jui Weng</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5652-0887">0000-0002-5652-0887</externalLink>)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Psychology+in+the+Schools%22"><i>Psychology in the Schools</i></searchLink>. 2025 62(9):3128-3143.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Wiley. Available from: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030. Tel: 800-835-6770; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: https://www.wiley.com/en-us
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 16
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2025
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Role%22">Teacher Role</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Role+Perception%22">Role Perception</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Interdisciplinary+Approach%22">Interdisciplinary Approach</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Attitude+Measures%22">Attitude Measures</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Factor+Analysis%22">Factor Analysis</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Test+Reliability%22">Test Reliability</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Test+Validity%22">Test Validity</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Foreign+Countries%22">Foreign Countries</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Curriculum+Development%22">Curriculum Development</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+Assessment%22">Educational Assessment</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Geographic Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Taiwan%22">Taiwan</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1002/pits.23529
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 0033-3085<br />1520-6807
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: An interdisciplinary curriculum provides integration of students' subjects and lives, guiding students to understand and engage with changes in the world through real situations and problems, with teachers playing a critical role. However, there is no assessment tool to explore teachers' interdisciplinary role perceptions (TIRP). In this study, an interdisciplinary role perceptions scale for teachers (TIRPS) was developed through literature analysis, expert appropriateness assessment, exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, and Cronbach's alpha reliability review. The results of the questionnaire were analyzed through importance-performance analysis to understand the current situation of TIRP in Taiwan. First, we found that the TIRPS has good reliability and validity and might be used as a tool for related interdisciplinary research. Second, the importance and performance of "interdisciplinary curriculum development roles" of teachers were well perceived. Third, the performance of teachers in interdisciplinary professional development roles needs to be enhanced with regard to "diagnosing interdisciplinary learning difficulties" and "working with interdisciplinary knowledge." Fourth, teachers identified the need to prioritize the performance of "interdisciplinary multiple-assessment." Finally, this study provides recommendations for the ongoing development of teachers' interdisciplinary role perceptions and meaningful interdisciplinary practices to enhance student well-being.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2025
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1479925
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1479925
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1002/pits.23529
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 16
        StartPage: 3128
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Teacher Role
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Role Perception
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Interdisciplinary Approach
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Attitude Measures
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Factor Analysis
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Test Reliability
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Test Validity
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Foreign Countries
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Curriculum Development
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Educational Assessment
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Taiwan
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Understanding Teachers' Interdisciplinary Role Perceptions: Scale Development and Importance-Performance Analysis
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Mei-Ju Chen
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Chao-Yu Guo
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Li-Ting Tseng
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Ming-Yi Chiu
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Hsuan-Jui Weng
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 09
              Type: published
              Y: 2025
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 0033-3085
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 1520-6807
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 62
            – Type: issue
              Value: 9
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Psychology in the Schools
              Type: main
ResultId 1