The development of school-based professional learning inventory (SPLI) Part II

Mansor Mahaliza, Yunus Jamal @ Nordin, Baharom Masri,

QR Code Link :
Type :	article
Subject :	L Education (General)
ISSN :	2222-6990
Main Author :	Mansor Mahaliza, Yunus Jamal @ Nordin, Baharom Masri,
Title :	The development of school-based professional learning inventory (SPLI) Part II

Place of Production :	HRMARS
Year of Publication :	2017

Full Text :

The purpose of this article is to report the development, validity and reliability of School-based professional learning inventory (SPLI) that has been used to evaluate secondary teachers` perception toward school-based professional learning. The first phase of the study has been carried out through Exploratory Factor Analysis by using data from 166 trained teachers from 19 secondary schools in Batang Padang District, Perak. The Exploratory Factor Analysis through orthogonal rotation varimax method has shown twelve SPLI factors from three main constructs have been developed. The Cronbach Alpha of the overall items is .918. For the second phase of the study, the Confirmatory Factor Analysis has been carried out toward data of 372 trained teachers from 50 secondary schools in Malaysia. The purpose of this analysis is to support the factor structure developed from the first phase of the study.The Cronbach Alpha of the items is .94, meanwhile for each factor developed ranged from .70 to .92. As the conclusion, the result of Confirmatory Factor Analysis has supported the ten factors developed from the first phase of the study

References

1. Abdull Kareem, O. & Khuan, W. B. (2005). Perkembangan Profesional Guru Secara-berterusan: Perspektif Pembangunan Sumber Manusia. Jurnal Masalah Pendidikan. http://myais.fsktm.um.edu.my/4991/ 2. Abdull Kareem. O. (2010). Teacher capacity building in teaching and learning: The changing role of school leadership. In Proc.2ndInternational Management Education Conference,Melaka, Malaysia. 3. Adey, P (2007). What’s next? CPD and the whole school. in J. Dillon & M. Maguire (Eds.).Becoming a teacher: Issues in secondary teaching. London: McGraw-Hill Open University Press. 357-366). 4. Babbie, E. R. (2007). Practice of social research. United States: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. 5. Bredeson, P. V. (2003). Designs for learning: A new architecture for professional development in schools. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin. 6. Byrne, B. M. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Routledge. 7. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education. Routledge 8. Dickey, D. (1996). Testing the fit of our models of psychological dynamics using confirmatory methods: An introductory primer. In B. Thompson (Ed.), Advances in social science methodology (Vol. 4, pp. 219-227). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. 9. Drago-Severson, E. (2004). Helping teachers learn: Principal leadership for adult growth and development. Corwin Press. 10. Flowers, C. (2006). Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Scores on the Clinical Experience Rubric A Measure of Dispositions for Preservice Teachers. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66(3), 478-488. 11. Guskey, T. R. (2000). Evaluating professional development. Corwin Press. 12. Guskey, T. R. (2005). Taking a Second Look at Accountability: Strong Evidence Reflecting the Benefits of Professional Development Is More Important than Ever before. Journal of Staff Development, 26(1), 10-18. 13. Hair J.F., Black W.C., Babin B.J., Andersen R.E & Tatham R.L. (2010). Mutilvariate data analysis (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ:Pearson Prentice Hall 14. Hall, G. E., & Hord, S. M. (2011). Implementing change: Patterns, principles, and potholes. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. 15. Henson, R. K., & Roberts, J. K. (2006). Use of exploratory factor analysis in published research: Common errors and some comment on improved practice. Educational and Psychological measurement, 66(3), 393-416. 16. Henson, R. K., Capraro, R. M., & Capraro, M. M. (2001). Reporting practice and use of exploratory factor analysis in educational research journals. Research in the school, 11, 61-72. 17. Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural equation modeling:a multidisciplinary journal,6(1),1-55. 18. Icobucchi.D,. (2010). Structural equation modeling: Fit indices, sample size and advance topics.Journal of Consumer Psychology, 20, 90-98. 19. Johnson, B., & Christensen, L. (2008). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches. Sage. 20. Kabilan, M.K., & Mohamed, A.,R. (2009). Malaysian english teachers' satisfaction level of their professional development. In Proc. Seminar Jawatankuasa Penyelarasan Pendidikan Guru 2009, Ipoh, Malaysia. 21. Killion, J. (1999). What works in the middle: Results-based staff development. Oxford: National Staff Development. 22. Kose, B. W. (2009). The principal’s role in professional development for social justice: An empirically-based transformative framework. Urban Education, 44(6), 628-663. 23. Leithwood, K., Day, C., Sammons, P., Harris, A., & Hopkins, D. (2006). Successful school leadership: what it is and how it influences pupil learning. London: Department for Education and Skills. DfES. Research Report 800. Disponible en: http://www. dcsf. gov. uk/research/data/uploadfiles/RR800. pdf. 24. Lindstrom, P. H., & Speck, M. (2004). The principal as professional development leader. Corwin Press. 25. Mansor, M., & Baharom, M. (2014). Assessing the school-based professional learning in Malaysian context (part II), International journal for innovation education and research, 2(11), 107-120. 26. Mansor, M., & Mat Norwani, N. (2010) Pembangunan professional berasaskan sekolah: Satu tinjauan awal. In Proc. International Management Education Conference 2010 (iMEC 2010), Melaka, Malaysia. 27. Mansor, M.,Mat Norwani.,N,& Yunus,J.(2010). Kesahan dan kebolehpercayaan alat ukur pentadbir sebagai pemimpin pembangunan profesional berasaskan sekolah (PPPS). In Proc. Seminar Sehari Penyelidikan, Tanjong Malim, Malaysia. 28. Mansor, M., Mat Norwani.,N, & Marzuki, S. (2001). Validity and reliability of the school-based professional development leader roles inventory. Management Research Journal, 1(1),73-87. 29. Mansor, M. (2013). Pembangunan model pembelajaran professional berasaskan sekolah di sekolah menengah harian di Malaysia. Unpublished doctoral diss., Tanjong Malim: Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris. 30. Murphy, C. U., & Lick, D. W. (2005). Whole-faculty study groups: Creating professional learning communities that target student learning. Corwin Press. 31. Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw–Hill. 32. Noah, S., M, & Ahmad, J. (2005). Pembinaan modul; Bagaimana membina modul latihan dan modul akademik. Serdang: Penerbit UPM. 33. OECD. (2010). TALIS 2008 technical report http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/16/14/44978960.pdf. OECD. 34. Persico, M. (2001). Exploring the relationship between the perceived leadership style of secondary principals and the professional development practices of their teachers.Unpublished doctoral diss., Bethlehm, Lehigh University. 35. Poekert, P.E., (2014). Teacher leadership and professional development: examining links between two concepts central to school improvement. Professional Development in Education, 38(2), 169-188 36. Rizvi, M. (2008). The role of school principals in enhancing teacher professionalism: Lessons from Pakistan. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 36(1),85-100.doi:10.1177/1741143207084062 37. Roberts, S. M., & Pruitt, E. Z. (Eds.). (2008). Schools as professional learning communities: Collaborative activities and strategies for professional development. Corwin Press. 38. Schumacker, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. (2010). A beginner's guide to structural equation modeling. Psychology Press..New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers. 39. Senin, A. (2005). Hubungan pengurusan pembangunan professional sekolah dengan model pembangunan professional serta pengaruhnya terhadap pengajaran guru di sekolah-sekolah menengah negeri Sabah, Ph.D thesis., Universiti Malaysia, Kota Kinabalu, Sabah. 40. Sireci, S. G., Yang, Y., Harter, J., & Ehrlich, E. J. (2006). Evaluating Guidelines For Test Adaptations A Methodological Analysis of Translation Quality. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 37(5), 557-567. 41. Sparks, D., & Loucks-Horsley, S. (1989). Five models of staff development. Journal of staff development, 10(4), 40-57. 42. Speck, M., & Knipe, C. (Eds.). (2005). Why can't we get it right?: Designing high-quality professional development for standards-based schools. Corwin Press. 43. Swaffield, S., & Alexandrou, A., (2014). Teacher leadership and professional development: perspectives, connections and prospects. Professional Development in Education, 38(2),159-168 44. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S., (2007). Using multivariate statistics. Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). New York: Allyn & Bacon 45. Wei, R. C., Darling-Hammond, L., Andree, A., Richardson, N., & Orphanos, S. (2009). Professional Learning in the Learning Profession: A Status Report on Teacher Development in the US and Abroad. Technical Report. National Staff Development Council. 46. Zepeda, S. J. (2012). Professional development: What works. Eye on education.

This material may be protected under Copyright Act which governs the making of photocopies or reproductions of copyrighted materials.
You may use the digitized material for private study, scholarship, or research.

Back to previous page