UPSI Digital Repository (UDRep)
Start | FAQ | About

QR Code Link :

Type :article
Subject :LB Theory and practice of education
ISSN :0313-5373
Main Author :Goh Pauline Swee Choo, Yusuf Qismullah,
Title :Validation of the Malaysian version of the teacher education program coherence questionnaire (IR)
Year of Publication :2017
PDF Full Text :The author has requested the full text of this item to be restricted.

Full Text :
The main purpose of this study was to validate a Malay Language version of a 30-item teacher education program coherence questionnaire. Two different samples of preservice teachers completed the Malay translation of the questionnaire. Exploratory factor analysis (N=220) showed four types of perceived program coherence which had good internal consistency ranging from 0.79 to 0.86:‘Opportunity to enact practice’, ‘Opportunity to analyze practice’,‘Opportunity to connect ideas across courses’ and ‘Coherence between courses and practical experience’. The confirmatory factor analysis (N= 234) provided support for a four-factor model. In addition, an analysis of criterion validity of the four types of perceived program coherence also indicated meaningful relationships to teaching efficacy. Our study supports the applicability of the Malaysian teacher education program coherence questionnaire for use among Malaysian preservice teachers. Both theoretical and practical implications are provided for teacher educators and researchers.

References
1. Ahmad Jazimin, J., Intan Safinas, M.A.B., Mohd Razali, M.Z., Mohd Hasan, A., Ong, K.B.,& Bushro, A. (2015). Views of mentor teachers on the implementation of teaching practices. International Journal of Contemporary Applied Sciences, 2(7), 112-122. 2. Bandalos,D.L., & Finney, S.J (2010). Factor analysis: Exploratory and confirmatory. In G.R. Hancock & R.O. Mueller (Eds.), The reviewer’s guide to quantitative methods in the social sciences (pp. 93-114). New York: Routledge. 3. Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological Methods & Research, 21(2), 230-258. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124192021002005 4. Buchman, M., & Floden, R.E. (1991). Programme coherence in teacher education: A view from the USA. Oxford Review of Education, 17(1), 65-72. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305498910170105 5. Cabaroglu, N. (2014). Re-visiting the theory and practice gap through the lens of student teacher dilemmas. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 39(2), 89-109.https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2014v39n2.10 6. Cabrera-Nguyen, P. (2010). Author guidelines for reporting scale development and validation. Journal of the Society for Social Work and Research, 1(2), 99-103. https://doi.org/10.5243/jsswr.2010.8 7. Canrinus, E.T., Bergem, O.K., Klette, K., & Hammerness, K. (2015). Coherent teacher education programmes: Taking a student perspective. Journal of Curriculum Studies. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2015.1124145 8. Costello, A.B., & Osborne, J.W. (2005). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation, 10(7), 1-9. 9. Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). Powerful teacher education: Lessons from exemplary programs. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. 10. Dobbins, R. (1996). Student teacher self-esteem in the practicum. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 21(2), 16-28. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.1996v21n2.2 11. Desimone, L.M., Porter, A.C., Garet, M.S., Yoon, K.S., & Birman, B.F. (2002). Effects of professional development on teachers’ instruction: Results from a three-year longitudinal study. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(2), 81-112. https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737024002081 12. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D.F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research 18 (1), 39-50 https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312 13. Forzani, F.M. (2014). Understanding “core practices” and “practice-based” teacher education: Learning from the past. Journal of Teacher Education, 65(4), 357-368. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487114533800 14. Goh, S.C. (2009). Preliminary study of approaches to learning and teaching self efficacy of student-teachers in Malaysia. Jurnal Bitara [Journal Bitara], 2(1), 14-29. 15. Goh, P.S.C., & Blake, D. (2014). Teacher preparation in Malaysia: Needed changes. Teaching in Higher, 20(5), 469-480. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2015.1020780 16. Goh, P.S., & Matthews, B. (2011) Listening To the concerns of student teachers In Malaysia during teaching practice. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 36(3), 92-103.https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2011v36n3.2 17. Goh, P.S.C., & Wong, K.T. (2014). Beginning teachers’ conceptions of competency: Implications to educational policy and teacher education in Malaysia. Educational Research of Policy and Practice, 13(1), 65-79. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10671-013-9147-3 18. Goh, P.S.C, Wong, K.T, & Hamzah, M. S.G. (2014). The Approaches to Teaching Inventory:A Preliminary Validation of the Malaysian Translation. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 39(1), 16-26. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2014v39n1.6 19. Gorsuch, R.L. (1983). Factor analysis (2nd ed.). New Jersey: Erlbaum. Grossman, P., Hammerness, K., McDonald, M., & Ronfeldt, M. (2008). Constructing coherence: Structural predictors of perceptions of coherence in NYC teacher education programmes. Journal of Teacher Education, 59(4), 273-287. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487108322127 20. Gurvitch, R., & Metzler, M.W. (2009). The effects if laboratory-based and field-based practicum experience on preservice teachers’ self-efficacy. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(1), 437-443. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2008.08.006 21. Hammerness, K. (2006). From coherence in theory to coherence in practice. Teacher College Record, 108(1), 1241-1265. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467 9620.2006.00692.x 22. Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., & Anderson, R.E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th edition). New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall. 23. Hammerness, K. (2013). Examining features of teacher education in Norway: Looking for vision, coherence and connections to practice. The Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 57(4), 400-419. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2012.656285 24. Hammerness, K., & Klette, K. (2015). Indicators of quality in teacher education: Looking at features of teacher education from an international perspective. In G.K. LeTendre & 25. A.W. Wiseman (Eds.), Promoting and sustaining a quality teaching workforce (pp. 239-277). Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1479- 367920140000027013 26. High-performing education. (2013). Malaysia economic monitor: High performing education. Bangkok: The World Bank. 27. Hoy, A. W., & Spero, R. B. (2005). Changes in teacher efficacy during the early years of teaching: A comparison of four measures. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(1), 343-356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2005.01.007 28. Jakobson, R. (2000). On linguistics aspects and translation. In L. Venuti (Ed.), The translation studies reader (pp. 113-18). New York: Routledge. 29. Johnson, R.A., & Wichern, D.W. (2014). Applied multivariate statistical analysis. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. 30. Kennedy, M. M. (2016). Parsing the practice of teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 67 (1), 6-16. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487115614617 31. Kenny, B., & Fahy, J. (2011), SMES’ networking capability and international performance. In R. Baxter and A.G. Woodside (Eds.), Interfirm networks: Theory, strategy and behavior (pp.199-376). Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1069-0964(2011)0000017006 32. Lim, K.S. (2012, September 13). New National Education Blueprint 2013-2025 leaves many crucial policy questions unanswered [Blog post]. Retrieved from http://blog.limkitsiang.com/2012/09/13/new-national-education-blueprint-2013-2025-leaves-many-crucial-policy-questions-unanswered/ Accessed 14 march 2014. 33. Malhotra, N. K. and Dash, S., (2010). Marketing Research: An Applied Orientation (6th ed). New Delhi: Pearson Pub. 34. Martin, A. (2007). Examining a multidimensional model of student motivation and engagement using a construct validation approach. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(2), 413-444. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709906X118036 35. Matsunaga, M. (2010). How to factor-analyze your data right: Do’s, don’ts and how-to’s.International Journal of Psychological Research, 3(1), 97-110. https://doi.org/10.21500/20112084.854 36. McArdle, F. (2010). Preparing quality teachers: Making learning visible. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 35(4), 60-78. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2010v35n8.5 37. Moore, R. (2003). Reexamining the field experiences of preservice teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 54(1), 31-42. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487102238656 38. Nixon, J. (1991). Reclaiming coherence: Cross-curriculum provision and the National Curriculum. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 23(2), 187-192. https://doi.org/10.1080/0022027910230209 39. Rindskopf, D., & Rose, T. (1988). Some theory and applications of confirmatory secondorder factor analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 23(1), 51– 67. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr2301_3 40. Russell, T., McPherson, S., & Martin, A.K. (2001). Coherence and collaboration in teacher education reform. Canadian Journal of Education, 26(1), 37-55. https://doi.org/10.2307/1602144 41. Smith, L.F., Corkery, C., Buckley, J., & Clavert, A. (2013). Changes in secondary school preservice teachers’ concerns about teaching in New Zealand. Journal of Teacher Education, 64(1), 60-74. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487112449019 42. Somekh, B., Chang, L.H., & and Noor Aini, A. (2011). The critical reflection profile: Working to raise the quality of teacher education in Malaysia. Journal of Research, Policy & Practice of Teachers and Teacher Education, 1(1), 59-75. 43. Tabachnick, B.G., & Fidell,L.S. ( 2001). Using multivariate statistics (3rd Edition). New York: Harper Collins. 44. Tatto, M.T. (1996). Examining values and beliefs about teaching diverse students: Understanding the challenges for teacher education. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 18(2),155-180. https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737018002155 45. Trigwell, K., & Prosser, M. (2004) Development and use of the approaches to teaching inventory. Educational Psychology Review, 16(4), 409-425. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-004-0007-9 46. Wetzels, M., Odekerken-Schroder, G., & van Oppen, C. (2009). Using PLS Path Modeling for assessing hierarchical construct models: Guidelines and empirical illustration, MIS Quarterly, 31(1), 177-195. https://doi.org/10.2307/20650284 41. World Bank: Worsening Obstacle to Malaysia’s high income hopes. (2013, December 11). Malay Mail Online. Retrieved from http://www.themalaymailonline.com/malaysia/article/world-bank-worseningeducation-obstacle-to-malaysias-high-income-hopes. 42. Zeichner, K. (2014). The struggle for the soul of teaching and teacher education in the USA. Journal of Education for Teaching: International Research and Pedagogy, 40(5), 551-568. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2014.956544 43. Zundans-Fraser, L., & Bain, A. (2016). How do institutional practices for course design and review address areas of need in higher education. Higher Education Research & Development, 35(4), 841-853. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2015.1137883

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

Installed and configured by Bahagian Automasi, Perpustakaan Tuanku Bainun, Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris
If you have enquiries with this repository, kindly contact us at pustakasys@upsi.edu.my or Whatsapp +60163630263 (Office hours only)