Skeleton of a report

Abstract
Introduction
Body
Literature Review
Rationale
Research questions
Methodology
Sample
Instrument
Table (3 table and 1 graph)

Internal Consistency Reliability (Cronbach’s Alpha Coefficient)

Comparison of Pupils’ Actual and Preferred Perceptions on DTOLE
Procedures
Data Analysis
Findings and Discussion
References
Recommendations
Conclusion

(approx 3-4 pgs, 1.5 line spacing)

Reflection on Session 4

It is a hands on session today. Case study on school learning environment helps to put what we've learned so far into perspective. Knowing these are actual schools helped us to apply our knowledge.
In most cases, when we administer any form of survey in school, there is usually only one set of questions. However, in todays' session, we learned about Actual and preferred responses to questionaires. SPSS as a tool for generating data and Cronbach's alpha reliability.

What does Cronbach's alpha mean?

Cronbach's alpha
Cronbach's alpha measures how well a set of items (or variables) measures a single unidimensional latent construct. When data have a multidimensional structure, Cronbach's alpha will usually be low. Technically speaking, Cronbach's alpha is not a statistical test - it is a coefficient of reliability (or consistency).
http://www.ats.ucla.edu/STAT/SPSS/faq/alpha.html
If you were giving an evaluation survey, would it not be nice to know that the instrument you are using will always elicit consistent and reliable response even if questions were replaced with other similar questions? When you have a variable generated from such a set of questions that return a stable response, then your variable is said to be reliable. Cronbach's alpha is an index of reliability associated with the variation accounted for by the true score of the "underlying construct." Construct is the hypothetical variable that is being measured (Hatcher, 1994).
Alpha coefficient ranges in value from 0 to 1 and may be used to describe the reliability of factors extracted from dichotomous (that is, questions with two possible answers) and/or multi-point formatted questionnaires or scales (i.e., rating scale: 1 = poor, 5 = excellent). The higher the score, the more reliable the generated scale is. Nunnaly (1978) has indicated 0.7 to be an acceptable reliability coefficient but lower thresholds are sometimes used in the literature.

Session 4 Pt 1

Assessing Learning Environment II

Then...
LE is assessed using validated instruments (eg CES)

Now....
How LE is assessed qualitatively.

What defines school LE?

Sch Culture
Student teacher interaction
Physical aspects
Learning styles of students
Teaching Methodology
Finance
Emotional well being
Student teacher Relationship
Discipline
Parents support
Leadership
Student attitude
Shared Vision ( bring out the best in every child)
School practices

Instrumentation: SLCEQ dimensions (appendix 2)
5pt likert scale

1. student support -relationship


2. affliation: feeling of being supported in the environment -relationship


3. Professional interest (teacher's personal professional growth) Personal growth


4. Achievement orientation (results focussed)Personal growth


5. staff freedom (extent to which trs have freedom to speak up or act) Systems maintenance and change


6. Participatory decision making -Systems maintenance and change


7. innovation (school's initiatives in innovation -Systems maintenance and change


8. resource adequacy -Systems maintenance and change


9. work pressure -Systems maintenance and change

(in a questionaire, per category, best to put about 5 items
f0r the scale, better to put Strongly Agree first. Use positive statements)

Examples of SLE study
Research questions
How do trs in each school percieve their school climate?

Reflections on Session 3: Assessmenrt of LE

A stimulating LE is essential in modern day teaching. Stimulation will come in the form of human as well as the setting. We need to move away from traditional teacher centred teaching to student centred learning. For engaged learning to take place, the ball should be thrown back to the students and teachers will only act as facilitator.

However, in the process of achieving an equilibrium in teacher- student relationship, the extent of people involvement and support for each other is vital. The needs of the individuals must be met or at least considered, before any forms of collaboration can take place. Take for the instance of grouping 4 individuals into a unit for class discussion, if the teacher did not bear in mind their differences and needs, clashes may occur and optimum results will not be achieved. Hence, we must fully understand the different types of human needs and how these needs are translated into behaviors. Likewise, for the teacher to feel comfortable to be a facilitator, her most basic needs, that of which authority is bestowed should be met, so that she will not have to fear students disturbance or disruption during the activity. Once individual needs are met, then we can talk about creating a supportive learning and teaching environment.

In such a stimulating and conducive LE, there will then be personal development, in both teacher and students. This is the direction along which personal growth and self enhancement occur. The teacher is comfortable to implement new teaching and learning strategies to stretch the students. She feels confident that whatever innovation she comes out with will have some chance of success. With success and support, the teacher will be spurred to create more innovative or engaging teaching and learning strategies. In the end, the students will also benefit. Learning is also enhanced.

To achieve a stimulating learning environment, the physical setting also plays a integral part. With the use of IT and cyberworld, learning transcends beyond classrooms. Learning is everywhere.

Session 3 Prt 3

Assessment of LE

How we assess LE

• Relationship

- extent of pple involvement and support for each other

• Personal Development

-Direction along which personal growth and self enhancement occur

• System maintenance and system change

-Extent which the environment is orderly

• Actual vs preferred forms

-measures perceptions of preferred vs actual

• Class vs personal forms

-elicit indiv pupil's perceptions of the class (class form)

- evaluate pupils' perception of his own role within class (personal form)

• Adaptation of instrumentation for use in different context
• Approach

-Use students' perception

• Instruments

- My Class inventory (MCI)

--> 3 pt likert scale

-->dimensions: Cohesiveness, friction, difficulty, competitiveness

-Science Lab Environment inventory

- E-learning

--> 5 pt likert scale

dimensions: Investigation, open endedness, orgn, competitiveness, mat'l envm, satisfaction

Session 3 lecture pt 2

Assessment of Learning Environment

Murray (1938)

• proposed a need-press model that follows the analogous representation of a person and environment
• Personal needs
• refers to motivational personality characteristics

Walberg(1968) and Moo (1968) research basis is formed based on Murray's model

Moo developed LE inventory(LEI) for Harvard Project Physics as well as the first social climate scales called Classroom Environment scales(CES)

He concluded thay LE could be described in 3 general categories:

Moo's Schemer

1. the relationship dimension
2. the personal development dimension
3. system maintenance and change dimension

(refer to pg 159 of Assessing LE in Swedish Sch)

These dimensions are further broken down into 10 different aspects of learning environment.

1. Creativity
2. Stimulation
3. Achievement
4. Efficacy
5. Safety
6. Control
7. Helpfulness
8. Participation
9. Responsibility
10. Influence

pg 163