Expert Evaluation on the Content Validity of the Novice Teachers’ Assessment Inventory (InPGN)

Muslihaza Musikin; Mohd Effendi a.k.a. Ewan Mohd Matore; Norazlinda Mohamad

doi:10.21834/e-bpj.v8iSI15.5087

Authors

Muslihaza Musikin SMK Sg Ramal, Bangi, Malaysia
Mohd Effendi a.k.a. Ewan Mohd Matore Faculty of Education, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi, Malaysia
Norazlinda Mohamad Europasia Engineering Services Sdn. Bhd, Petaling Jaya, Malaysia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21834/e-bpj.v8iSI15.5087

Keywords:

Content Validity, Assessment Literacy , Novice Teacher, Expert Concensus

Abstract

This study aims to evaluate the validity of the Novice Teachers' Assessment Inventory (InPGN) utilizing expert consensus perspectives and the Content Validity Index (CVI). A total of 97 items involved nine experts from assessment literacy, psychometrics, and language field by using purposive sampling. Validity tests found that InPGN has a CVI value of 0.98, indicating a very high level of instrument suitability. An implication of this remains expected to provide an excellent measurement tool in helping novice teachers improve their professional development in a more authentic assessment dimension.

References

Abu Mansor, N. (2017). Pengukuran pengetahuan, amalan dan integriti pentaksiran bilik darjah dalam kalangan guru Reka Bentuk dan Teknologi. [Master’s thesis, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia]. Universiti Teknologi Malaysia

Almanasreh, E., Moles, R. & Chen, T.F. (2019). Evaluation of methods used for estimating content validity. Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy, 15(2): 214–221. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sapharm.2018.03.066. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sapharm.2018.03.066

Curriculum Development Division (BPK)(2018). Panduan Pelaksanaan Pentaksiran Bilik Darjah. Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia (1st ed.). Curriculum Development Division. http://jpnperak.moe.gov.my/ppdbagandatuk/attachments/article/3555/Panduan Pelaksanaan Pentaksiran Bilik Darjah 2018.pdf.

Creswell, J.W. (2014) Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches. (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA.

Davis, L.L. (1992). Instrument review: Getting the most from a panel of experts. Applied Nursing Research, 5(4): 194–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0897-1897(05)80008-4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0897-1897(05)80008-4

Deluca, C., Lapointe-mcewan, D. & Luhanga, U. (2016). Approaches to classroom assessment inventory: A new instrument to support teacher assessment literacy. Educational Assessment, 21(4): 248–266. https://doi.org/10.1080/10627197.2016.1236677 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10627197.2016.1236677

Fraenkel, J.R. & Wallen, N.E. (2009). How to design and evaluation research in education. (7th ed.). McGraw-Hill.

Gotch, C.M. & French, B.F. (2014). A systematic review of assessment literacy measures. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 33(2): 14–18. https://doi.org/10.1111/emip.12030 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/emip.12030

Grant, J.S. & Davis, L.L. (1997). Selection and use of content experts for instrument development. Research in Nursing & Health, 20(3): 269–274. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-240X(199706)20:3<269::AID-NUR9>3.0.CO;2-G DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-240X(199706)20:3<269::AID-NUR9>3.0.CO;2-G

Hopfenbeck, T.N. (2019). Assessment literacy across contexts and competencies. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 26(2): 119–122. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2019.1601357. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2019.1601357 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2019.1601357

Koloi-Keaikitse, S. (2012). Classroom assessment practices: A survey of Botswana primary and secondary school teachers. [Doctoral dissertation, Ball State University]. https://cardinalscholar.bsu.edu/bitstream/handle/123456789/195866/Koloi-KeaikitseS_2012-2_BODY.pdf;sequence=1

Lynn, M.R. (1986). Determination and quantification of content validity. Nursing Research, 35(6): 382–386. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006199-198611000-00017 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00006199-198611000-00017

Pastore, S. & Andrade, H.L. (2019). Teacher assessment literacy: A three-dimensional model. Teaching and Teacher Education, 84: 128–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.05.003 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.05.003

Polit, D.F. & Beck, C.T. (2006). The content validity index: Are you sure you know what’s being reported? Critique and recommendations. Research in Nursing & Health, 31(4): 341–354.

Polit, D.F., Beck, C.T. & Owen, S. V. (2007). Is the CVI an acceptable indicator of content validity? Appraisal an recommendations. Research in Nursing & Health, 30(4): 459–467. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.20199 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.20199

Rubio, D.M., Berg-Weger, M., Tebb, S.S., Lee, E.S. & Rauch, S. (2003). Objectifying content validity: Conducting a content validity study in social work research. Sosial Work Research, 27(2): 94–104. https://doi.org/10.1093/swr/27.2.94 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/swr/27.2.94

Stiggins, R.J. (1991). Assessment literacy. The Phi Delta Kappan, 72(7): 534–539.

Suah See Ling. (2012). Analisis Model Literasi dan amalan pentaksiran guru sekolah serta kajian tentang jurang antara keduanya. [Doctoral thesis, Universiti Sains Malaysia]. School of Educational Studies, Universiti Sains Malaysia.

Willis, J., Adie, L. & Klenowski, V. (2013). Conceptualising teachers’ assessment literacies in an era of curriculum and assessment reform. Australian Educational Researcher, 40(2): 241–256. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-013-0089-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-013-0089-9

Yaghmaie, F. (2003). Content validity and its estimation. Journal of Medical Education, 3(1): 25–27.