Session 4: Reflections on Assessment Tools
The use of WIHIC provides teachers with a way of looking at different aspects of their classroom environment which they intended to create. By getting the responses of the students, one can first and foremost see what the students see as the most ideal environment for them to thrive in. After administering the actual form, one can compare the difference between the actual and ideal. This use of comparing preferred and actual items is an excellent idea as teachers can really see how far the students are from what they perceive they would like to be at. As such, teachers need not be always wondering how much more they more to improve to meet the students' expectations or that they are contented with so-called positive results although these results may still be less than what they deemed as ideal.
Take for example if the class actual ideal has a mean of 3 (1 being least ideal and 4 being most ideal), one more conclude that the class is doing well and not much improvement needs to be put in. However if the class preferred happen to be 3.75, then although the actual is positive, it still shows that there is some way to go. A so-called negative result may also not be too bad. If the actual mean is 2.5, one may think it's bad. But if the preferred is 2.75, then the disparity is not that far. So the use of the actual and preferred questionnaire is helpful in data analysis.
As for the creation of the items within a questionnaire, much thought is needed to create a form that is useful for analysis. This has to be done firstly to ensure that what needs to be measured is being measured. Dimensions to include may be based on previous research papers that have been published to form the basis for adaptation. The other aspect would be to make sure that the questionnaire is in itself a reliable and valid instrument so that results and recommendations made after analysis are actually what can improve the current situation rather than wrongly interpreted results and recommendations that will later on be carried out but have no significant impact whatsoever.
This is absolutely necessary for viable Action Research topics to enable a teacher to go through at least two cycles of the same topic. This leads to the question of what type of Action research are we conducting in schools. Much of the time, these are done haphazardly due to the lack of time even though the finished article may look quite polished. Topics are chosen not for the purpose of doing more than one cycle but rather something that seems interesting at the moment. With real follow-up missing, the true essence of AR is slightly lost. For AR to thrive in Singapore, it's not just about having school leaders push for it. It must be marketed as being helpful to one's teaching practice and on a longer term basis (at least 2 cycles) and more help in terms of actual design can be provided. Of course, schools already engage consultants to facilitate the beginning process, which may include the basic research design and methodology, and also occasionally in the interpretation of results. However the "problem" begins much earlier in that these researchers are often not prepared to perform it.
So in conducting quantitative research especially for AR, more thought can be put in to include instruments such as WIHIC for the purpose of improving classroom processes and not just to get a snapshot of what is happening.
Take for example if the class actual ideal has a mean of 3 (1 being least ideal and 4 being most ideal), one more conclude that the class is doing well and not much improvement needs to be put in. However if the class preferred happen to be 3.75, then although the actual is positive, it still shows that there is some way to go. A so-called negative result may also not be too bad. If the actual mean is 2.5, one may think it's bad. But if the preferred is 2.75, then the disparity is not that far. So the use of the actual and preferred questionnaire is helpful in data analysis.
As for the creation of the items within a questionnaire, much thought is needed to create a form that is useful for analysis. This has to be done firstly to ensure that what needs to be measured is being measured. Dimensions to include may be based on previous research papers that have been published to form the basis for adaptation. The other aspect would be to make sure that the questionnaire is in itself a reliable and valid instrument so that results and recommendations made after analysis are actually what can improve the current situation rather than wrongly interpreted results and recommendations that will later on be carried out but have no significant impact whatsoever.
This is absolutely necessary for viable Action Research topics to enable a teacher to go through at least two cycles of the same topic. This leads to the question of what type of Action research are we conducting in schools. Much of the time, these are done haphazardly due to the lack of time even though the finished article may look quite polished. Topics are chosen not for the purpose of doing more than one cycle but rather something that seems interesting at the moment. With real follow-up missing, the true essence of AR is slightly lost. For AR to thrive in Singapore, it's not just about having school leaders push for it. It must be marketed as being helpful to one's teaching practice and on a longer term basis (at least 2 cycles) and more help in terms of actual design can be provided. Of course, schools already engage consultants to facilitate the beginning process, which may include the basic research design and methodology, and also occasionally in the interpretation of results. However the "problem" begins much earlier in that these researchers are often not prepared to perform it.
So in conducting quantitative research especially for AR, more thought can be put in to include instruments such as WIHIC for the purpose of improving classroom processes and not just to get a snapshot of what is happening.
posted by Covenant Youths at 2:45 PM
0 comments
