The purpose of this study was to establish and describe the validity and reliability of an instrument based on a model of teaching behaviors conceived as magnetic lines of force.Content validity was established by reviewing the literature and identifying possible teaching behaviors which researchers felt contributed to increased pupil learning. These behaviors were presented to a panel of judges from faculty in the Teachers College, Ball State University, to ascertain behaviors which they felt increase the likelihood pupils would increase comprehension in reading. After the panel had made their suggestions, the list of behaviors was revised and used with two middle school classes at the Burris Laboratory School. Pupils were asked to identify the behaviors which they felt were associated with their increased learning. A final list of twenty items became the revised instrument for use in the study.A group of practicing teachers critiqued the list of twenty behaviors. This group was directed to identify how strongly they agreed with the placement of each of the behaviors under one of the four scales postulated.Construct validity was established by discussing the research supporting each of the scales, subscales and behaviors listed in the instrument.Each of the twenty items was judged as valid by a minimum of 70 percent of the selected panel members and the twenty items included was recognized as a valid example of the constructs identified with the exception of those items assumed to reflect firmness.It was possible to relate each of the twenty items in the instrument to research studies accepted by editors and authors in the field despite inherent weaknesses in definitions, experimental designs, and theoretical orientation. In this sense, the instrument has acceptable construct validity.The instrument was then used to gather data on a group of teacher trainees assigned to a laboratory school at Ball State University. After each teacher trainee had taught a short unit, the pupils taught filled out the instrument which had been devised.Reliability measures consisted of computing coefficient alpha for various major scales and subscales of the instrument. Computations were run by the Ball State University Center using the reliability program from the SPSS Statistical Package for the Social Sciences DEC system –10.The coefficient alpha reliability indexes of .90 for the total scale, .86 for the cognitive scale, and .78 for the affective scale were judged acceptable for use in additional research studies in the field. The coefficient alpha reliability index of .82 for the clarity subscale, .81 for the flexibility subscale, and .78 for the warmth subscale were also judged acceptable for use in additional reliability index of .68 for the firmness subscale suggest questionable reliability for all but the most general research purposes.Recommendations were formulated to encourage further development of the model and refinement of the instrument (particularly the "firmness" subscale).
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:BSU/oai:cardinalscholar.bsu.edu:handle/177460 |
| Date | January 1977 |
| Creators | Kratzner, Roland R. |
| Contributors | Harshbarger, Mary E. |
| Source Sets | Ball State University |
| Detected Language | English |
| Format | ix, 146 leaves ; 28 cm. |
| Source | Virtual Press |
Page generated in 0.002 seconds