Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Chapter - Iii Method and Procedure
Chapter - Iii Method and Procedure
these
variables,
proper
procedure
and
SAMPLE
The universe of the study was senior secondary
85
S.No.
I.
Name of School
Urban Schools
S.No.
Name of School
Rural Schools
S.No.
Name of School
3.2
Variable
Male
129
28.67
Female
321
71.33
Rural
206
45.78
Urban
244
54.22
Science
117
26.00
Social Sciences
175
38.89
Languages
158
35.11
Gender
Location of School
Stream of Teaching
128
28.44
9 15
175
38.89
16 (and more)
147
32.67
TOOLS USED
The investigator used two sets of tools in the present
namely,
teacher
attitude
inventory
and
job
aspirations.
It
is
further
added
that
teachers,
was
thought
to
be
much
easier
and
K nowledge
of
Subject
Mat t er;
It s Deliv ery
and
area
includes
statements
pertaining
to
the
91
Response Mode
This scale has a list of 60 items. There is no time limit
and there are no right or wrong responses. Hence the
individuals are quite free to express their responses as they
perceive,
keeping
in
view
the
maximum
possible
of
180
prospective
teachers.
The
test-retest
92
Table 3.2
Reliabilit y of Teacher Effect iv eness Scale
S.No.
Reliabilit y
Co-efficient of
Reliabilit y
Index
1.
0.68
rtt = 0.82
2.
0.63
rtt = 0.79
Validit y
Three types of criterion-related validity have been
established for the scale. These were based on:
i). The correlation between headmasters ratings with
teachers effectiveness score;
ii). The correlation between the scores of the criterion
item namely In general how effective are you in your
job and the scores on teachers effectiveness scale;
and
iii). t value calculated with the scores of the contrasted
groups identified by the headmasters as effective and
ineffective teachers.
For this purpose a rating scale was developed by the
investigator, which is a numerical rating scale with five
areas of five items. Each area was operationally defined
which had five alternate responses 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 respectively.
Inter-rater reliability and test-retest reliability were
established to the rating scales. In this process 60 teachers
selected at random from eight schools of Banglore were
rated by their headmasters and also assistant headmasters
separately at a point of time. The correlation between these
two
ratings
by
test
retest
technique,
the
rating
of
93
Scale (Self)
Preparation and
Preparation and
0.64
Classroom Management
Classroom Management
0.72
Knowledge of subject
Knowledge of subject
0.57
matter
matter
Teacher characteristics
Teacher characteristics
0.78
Interpersonal Relations
Interpersonal Relations
0.66
Total Score
Total Score
0.85
N=92
N=88
M=398.70
M=287.40
9.9*
*p < 0.01
95
Table 3.5
Int er-correlat ions among v arious Areas of Teacher
Effect iv eness Scale (N=180)
S.No.
Areas
Preparation &
Planning for
Teaching
Classroom
management
Knowledge of
subject
matter, etc.
Teacher
Characteristics
Interpersonal
Relations
2
3
4
5
Prep.
&
Plan.
For
T e ac h.
Classroom
Manag.
K nlg.
T r.Chr.
I nt r.Persnl.
Relns.
T ot al
Sc ore
0.24
0.36
0.50
0.40
0.76
0.29
0.16
0.46
0.69
0.44
0.43
0.73
0.41
0.71
0.76
Climat e
Descript ion
the
School
Organizational
Climate
Description
organizational
climate
is
closely
related
to
the
Intimacy
and
Production
Emphasis,
factor
(Hindrances,
Alienation,
Thrust,
and
Characteristics
and
Leader
Behaviour
Characteristics.
1. Group Behav iour Charact erist ics
1. Disengagement : It refers to the teachers tendency to
be not with it. This dimension describes a group
which is going through the motions a group that is
not in gear with respect to the task at hand. In short,
97
climate
is
to
the
organization.
Sharma
of
the
roles
organization
while
when
satisfying
they
their
fulfill
their
operationally
99
100
(Kuder-Richardson
formula)
was
used
for
101
Coefficient s
of int ernal
consist ency
based on K R20
(N=1915)
0.67
Communalit y
est imat es for
indiv idual
scores
(N=1915)
Communalit y
Est imat es for
school scores
(N=95)
0.18
0.51
Alienation
0.61
0.24
0.52
Esprit
0.73
0.43
0.69
Intimacy
0.34
0.28
0.10
Psycho-
0.68
0.61
0.60
Controls
0.59
0.37
0.50
Production
0.81
0.54
0.70
0.72
0.51
0.65
Disengagement
physical
Hindrance
emphasis
Humanized
Thrust
Validit y
This tool was given to 15 experts in the field of
educational administration. All the experts with minor
differences were found to agree with each other to a great
extent. This indicated high face content validity of the
102
SOCDQ.
Secondly, no significant difference was found between
the proportionate climate-distributions in the two samples
that of Halpin and Crofts Study (1963) and Sharmas study
(1973) having different organizational structure and located
in two different cultures. This further ascertained the
validity of the tool.
Again, Sharma (1973) developed a rating scale and
sent the same to the district inspectors of schools of each
district, along with the definitions of eight dimensions and
climate types, and requested them to rate the schools of
their respective districts included in Sharmas study (1973).
Coefficient
of
inspectors
and
(Sharma,
correlation
1973)
the
by
between
results
the
observed
administering
ratings
the
the
of
the
investigator
SOCDQ
was
changing
the
organizational
climate
of
training
in
of
six
sub-scales.
These
sub-scales
were
prospective
and
practicing
teachers
professional
attitude
teaching;
towards:
child-centered
teaching
profession;
practices;
class-room
educational
process;
pupils; teachers.
Originally 300 attitude statements, 50 on each subscale were collected from diverse sources. After careful
discussions and cautions, deliberations in two seminars of
educators, teacher-educators, measurement specialists and
knowledgeable
persons
in
the
fields
of
education,
25
on
each
sub-scale,
were
retained
for
105
Scoring
Each item alternative is assigned a weight ranging
from
(strongly
agree)
to
(strongly
disagree)
for
favourable
attitude
towards
teaching
and
allied
aspects.
Reliabilit y
Reliability by the split-half (odd even) method was
found to be 0.79 (corrected to 0.88) for a sample of 239
prospective teachers. The test-retest reliability co-efficients
after the interval of 3 months and 9 months were found to
be 0.59 (N=102) and 0.64 (N=299). The details of reliability
coefficient
indicators
of
reliability,
corrected
reliability
106
Table 3.7
Reliabilit y Coefficient s, I ndicat ors of Reliabilit y ,
Correct ed Coefficient s and St andard Errors of
Measurement
S.No.
Me t hod
Splithalf
Reli abili t y
Obt ai ned
r
Coeffi ci e nt s
Corre ct e d
r
I ndex of
Reli abili t y
St andard
Error
Me asure m e nt
r 100
0.79
0.88
11.37
0.58
0.75
0.76
16.17
0.64
0.78
0.80
15.16
0.54
0.70
0.73
20.10
11.37
(odd even)
2
Test-retest
( 3 months)
Test-rest (9
months)
Rational
equivalence
(KR 21)
Validit y
The inventory appears to have content validity, and
the method of selecting item supports this supposition. In
addition, differences in mean scores were found among
some selected known groups. The mean scores for B.A.
Part I and II students offering and not offering Education as
an elective subject, B.Ed. trainees and practicing teachers
were computed and compared. The observed differences
were found to be in the expected direction. The validity was
also determined through stimulus group technique. Table
3.8 presents at a glance a summary of the obtained results.
107
Table 3.8
Means, St andard Dev iat ion and Ot her Measures of Some
Select ed Groups
S.No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Group
B.A. Part I
56 230.53
(Not offering education
elective)
B.A. Part II
53 230.73
(Not offering education
elective)
B.A. Part I
70 237.98
(Offering
Education
Elective)
B.A. Part II
47 252.91
(Offering
Education
Elective)
Practicing
122 251.41
Prospective Teacher
86
25.45
(At the time of B.Ed.
Admission)
Prospective Teachers
86 256.29
(after 9 months of
B.Ed. training)
SEM
SD
SESD
2.94 21.98
2.09
3.44 28.74
2.44
3.41 23.36
2.41
4.65 33.91
3.30
2.78 30.70
3.36 31.12
1.97
2.39
3.60 33.38
2.56
assess
the
job
satisfaction,
Teachers
Job
The teacher job-satisfaction questionnaire, being selfadministering, emphasized that no item should be omitted
and there was nothing right or wrong about these
questions. They were encouraged to answer each item
according to their personal agreement or disagreement. It
was assured that their replies would be kept confidential.
No time limit was assigned. The teacher job satisfaction
questionnaire consists of 29 highly discriminating yes-no
type items. The area wise description of questionnaire items
purports to measure the degree to which the teachers have
attitudes towards profession, working conditions, authority,
institutional plans and policies. It is also added that the
most
direct
use
to
which
teacher
job
satisfaction
split-half
reliability
(correlating
the
odd-even
r-value
Index of Reliabilit y
Split-half
100
0.95
0.97
Test-retest
60
0.73
0.85
Validit y
Only highly discriminating items were included in the
questionnaire following item analysis (Gerrett, 1961), in
which the upper 27% and the lower 27% of the subjects
served as criterion groups (Kelley, 1939). The face validity of
the measure is very high. The content validity is ensured as
the items for which there has been 100 percent agreement
amongst judges regarding their relevance to teacher job
satisfaction area included in the questionnaire. The male
and
female
teachers
are
to
be
interpreted
in
the
Male
Female
T ot al
90
25.85
25.89
25.92
80
22.01
22.63
22.32
75
20.62
21.28
20.95
70
19.00
19.24
19.12
60
17.01
17.39
17.20
50
15.38
15.66
15.52
40
13.30
13.70
13.50
30
11.10
11.54
11.32
25
9.90
10.14
10.02
20
9.00
9.08
9.04
10
6.34
6.56
6.45
Median
15.38
15.66
15.32
mean
scores
The
are
used
Very good
Good
Average
Poor
Very poor
alongwith
comparing
were
administered
to
selected
school
teachers
SCORING OF T OOLS
Keeping
statistical
in
view
treatment
the
of
purpose
data,
the
of
the
scoring
study
of
and
different
FOR MULATION OF
FACTOR IAL
DESIGN
STATI STICAL TR EAT MENT OF DAT A
AND
of
teaching
climate
effectiveness
alongwith
some
with
other
school
personal
111
112