This paper contains an analysis and justification for the construct development written previously. The instrument developed regarded an instructor evaluation using a Likert 1-5 one-dimensional scale. A median score rather than a mean score is used. The objective of the evaluation was to study the instructor's effectiveness of teaching and motivating the class. This paper covers the establishment of norms and the definitions for validity and reliability.
Part II Analysis and Justification
Of Construct Development
This paper is the second part of an assignment due the fourth week of class regarding construct development. This is an analysis and justification of that instrument. In developing that instrument, I chose to evaluate a construct involving evaluation of an instructor's performance. The first step was to create an operational definition, The first step in all scaling methods is to define what it is you want to measure, why was the instrument developed and what is the objective of the measurement? (Leahy, 1980) The instrument evaluates and studies the instructor's effectiveness of teaching methods, motivating the class and observing if changes need to occur in the instructor's methods. One important factor is that the questions on the instrument must focus on observable behaviors (Armstrong, 1998). The instruments value is to make the students feel comfortable with the methods used in the class. Retesting each 12 weeks provides for consistency of methods.
Providing norms for the instrument consist of 20 parents at risk for abusing children. Each of the parents completed a 12-week parenting course. In the sample the ages range from 19-40, six males, 14 females. Ten of these people reside in rural areas six in urban areas and four are from a different county. Ethnically there are four African Americans, four Hispanics and 11 Caucasians. The marital status of the people indicate five are single parents, eight are...