مطالعات اندازه گیری و ارزشیابی آموزشی

مطالعات اندازه گیری و ارزشیابی آموزشی

اعتبارسنجی پرسشنامة برنامه‌درسی پیوندیافته فانگ؛ تعیین پایایی و روایی سازه

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان
گروه علوم تربیتی، دانشکده علوم انسا نی و اجتماعی، دانشگاه کردستان، سنندج، ا یران .
10.22034/emes.2024.2012132.2507
چکیده
هدف: هدف اصلی تحقیق حاضر اعتبارسنجی پرسشنامه  برنامه‌درسی پیوندیافته (فانگ، 2017) در سه حوزة علوم پایه، مهندسی و انسانی و اجتماعی دانشگاه کردستان است.
روش پژوهش: روش پژوهش از نوع کمی و با راهبرد پیمایشی است. جامعه آماری برای این پژوهش کلیه استادان سه دانشکده علوم پایه، علوم مهندسی و علوم انسانی با حجم کل 483 نفر است که 112 نفر به‌عنوان نمونه به‌ صورت طبقه‌ای انتخاب شدند. محققان پس از ترجمة نسخه اصلی انگلیسی پرسشنامه توسط دو نفر متخصصِ رشتة ترجمه، پس از مشورت با اساتید علوم تربیتی در مورد نسخة نهایی توافق حاصل کردند. برای تجزیه و تحلیل داده‌‌ها از نرم افزار آماری SPSS26  و جهت برازش مدل اندازه‌گیری از مدل معادلات ساختاری SmartPLS3  نیز استفاده شد.
یافته‌ها: نتایج حاصل از مدل نشان داد که چارچوب برنامه‌درسی پیوندیافته با هفت عامل اصلی از نظر ارزیابی مدل اندازه‌گیری که با شاخص‌های آلفای کرونباخ، پایایی ترکیبی، روایی همگرا و واگرا اندازه‌گیری شد مطلوب، مناسب و قوی است؛ همچنین از نظر مدل ساختاری که از طریق شاخص‌های Z و R2 ، Q2  اندازه‌گیری شد نیز چارچوبی قوی داری دارد.
نتیجه‌گیری: پرسشنامه برنامه‌درسی پیوندیافته ابزاری مناسب برای پژوهش‌های ایرانی بافت آموزش عالی می‌باشد. 
کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله English

Validating Fung’s Connected Curriculum Questionnaire; Assessing Reliability and Construct Validity

نویسندگان English

Abdullah Azizi
Jamal Salimi
Department of Education, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Univesity of Kurdistan, Sanandaj, Iran .
چکیده English

Objective: The purpose of the present study was to validate the applicability of the Connected Curriculum Questionnaire (Fung, 2017) across three fields: basic sciences, engineering, humanities, and social sciences at the University of Kurdistan.
Methods: To achieve this objective, the main questionnaire in English was translated by two experts in the field of translation, and it was subsequently evaluated by two experts in the field of education. Then, a consensus was reached on the final version. The research method employed in this study was survey research. The statistical population comprised all 483 faculty members from three faculties of science, engineering, and humanities and social sciences. A stratified sample of 112 faculty members was selected. To analyze the data, SPSS 26 was employed, and to fit the measurement model, the SmartPLS 3 was utilized.
Results: The results indicated that the Connected Curriculum Framework, with its seven dimensions, is robust, appropriate, and highly effective when assessing the measurement model, as evidenced by Cronbach's alpha, composite reliability, convergent and divergent validity indices. Moreover, the measurement model demonstrates a robust structure, as indicated by the Z, R2, and Q2 indices.
Conclusion: It can be inferred that the Connected Curriculum Questionnaire serves as a valuable tool for research in the Iranian higher education context.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Keywords: the Connected Curriculum Framework
higher education
validate
research
education

References

Etemadizade, H., Liaghatdar, M. J., Nasr, A., & Mosapour, N. (2011). A Deliberation on Interdisciplinary Research in Higher Education. Interdisciplinary Studies in Humanities3(2), 15-50.
Pasdar, Y., Karami B., Najafi, F., Niazi, P., and Darbandi, M. (2014). Research-oriented Education in the Process of Providing a Practical Lesson on Applied Nutrition. Medicine and Cultivation, 24(1), 19-30
Khorsandi Taskoh, A. (2009). Typological Diversity in Interdisciplinary Research and Education. Quarterly Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies in Humanities, 1(4), 57-83.
Fakuhi, N. (2017). The University as it was. The Research Institute of Cultural and Social Studies: Tehran, Iran.
Kant, I. (2020). The Conflict of the Faculties (Mousavi, M. Trans.). Shabkhiz Publications: Tehran, Iran. (Original work published 1798)
Kodkhodapour, J. & Qayyomi Abargoui, A. (2013). The Relationship Between Education and Research in New Universities. Science and Technology Policy, 4(3), 29-46.
Keshavarz Rodaki, U., Fathi Vajargah, K., Hosseini Largani, M., and Yadgarzadeh, G. (2022). Compilation of Connected Curriculum Framework in Iran's Higher Education. Karafan Quarterly Scientific Journal. doi: 10.48301/kssa.2023.368582.2335
Jaspers, Carl. (2015). The Idea of University (Parsa, M. Trans.).  Qaqnoos publishing house: Tehran, Iran. (Original work published 1893)
Afouras, T., Chung, J. S., Senior, A., Vinyals, O., & Zisserman, A. (2018). Deep audio-visual speech recognition. IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence, 44(12), 8717-8727.
Brent C., Dilly F. (2017). Developing the Higher Education Curriculum: Research-Based Education in Practice. United Kingdom: UCL Press.
Brosnan, C. (2016). Bourdieu and the future of knowledge in the university. In Bourdieusian prospects (pp. 61-82). Routledge.
Clarke, J. L., & Boud, D. (2018). Refocusing portfolio assessment: Curating for feedback and portrayal. Innovations in education and teaching international, 55(4), 479-486.
Dodd, B. J. (2021). Curriculum design processes. Design for Learning.
Fung, D. (2014). Connected Curriculum: Transforming education at University College London. UCL Academic Committee paper. 3 July.
Fung, D. (2017). A Connected Curriculum for Higher Education. UCL Press.
Fung, D., & Gordon, C. (2016). Rewarding educators and education leaders in research-intensive universities.
Fung, D., & Wood, C. (2014). Engaging students to enhance the postgraduate research experience. In Higher Education Academy Conference, 1st July. Available on-line at https://www. heacademy. ac. uk/node/3308. Accessed 1st August.
Goodwin, M., Are, K., Goodwin-Hawkins, B., Aayeshah, W., & Lakey, E. (2019). The capstone experience: Five principles for a connected curriculum. In Higher Education and the Future of Graduate Employability (pp. 139-159). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Huutoniemi, K. (2010). Evaluating interdisciplinary research (Vol. 10, pp. 309-20). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Khandagale, V., & Shine, A. (2018). Designing Connected Curriculum for the Post Graduate Course in Education. Aarhat Multidisciplinary International Education Research Journal, 7, 131-137.
Nazarenko, M. A., & Khronusova, T. V. (2017, September). Big data in modern higher education. Benefits and criticism. In 2017 International Conference" Quality Management, Transport and Information Security, Information Technologies"(IT&QM&IS) (pp. 676-679). IEEE.
Ocran, T. K., & Afful-Arthur, P. (2022). The role of digital scholarship in academic libraries, the case of university of cape coast: opportunities and challenges. Library Hi Tech, 40(6), 1642-1657.
Pascoe, M. C., Hetrick, S. E., & Parker, A. G. (2020). The impact of stress on students in secondary school and higher education. International Journal of Adolescence and Youth, 25(1), 104-112.
Patton, L. D. (Ed.). (2023). Culture centers in higher education: Perspectives on identity, theory, and practice. Taylor & Francis.
Rhoten, D. (2004). Interdisciplinary research: Trend or transition. Items and Issues, 5(1-2), 6-11.
Struthers, D., & Van Arsdale, R. (2020). The Connected Curriculum Framework: Case study of University College London. Routledge.
Thomas, I., & Depasquale, J. (2016). Connecting curriculum, capabilities and careers. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education17(6), 738-755.
Toquero, C. M. (2020). Challenges and opportunities for higher education amid the COVID-19 pandemic: The Philippine context. Pedagogical Research, 5(4).
Williams, P. (2017). Assessing collaborative learning: big data, analytics and university futures. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(6), 978-989.
Zawacki-Richter, O., Marín, V. I., Bond, M., & Gouverneur, F. (2019). Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education–where are the educators?. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(1), 1-27.
Van Rijnsoever, F. J., & Hessels, L. K. (2011). Factors associated with disciplinary and interdisciplinary research collaboration. Research policy, 40(3), 463-472
Goodwin, M., Are, K., Goodwin-Hawkins, B., Aayeshah, W., & Lakey, E. (2019). The capstone experience: Five principles for a connected curriculum. In Higher Education and the Future of Graduate Employability (pp. 139-159). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Streveler, R. A., Litzinger, T. A., Miller, R. L., & Steif, P. S. (2008). Learning conceptual knowledge in the engineering sciences: Overview and future research directions. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(3), 279-294.
Amaratunga, D., & Senaratne, S. (2009). Principles of integrating research into teaching in higher education: Built environment perspective. International Journal of Construction Education and Research, 5(3), 220-232.
Paxson, T. D. (1996). Modes of interaction between disciplines. The Journal of General Education, 45(2), 79-94.
Fung, D. (2016). Engaging Students with Research Through a Connected Curriculum: An Innovative Institutional Approach. Council on Undergraduate Research Quarterly, 37(2).
Bismack, A. S., Arias, A. M., Davis, E. A., & Palincsar, A. S. (2014). Connecting curriculum materials and teachers: Elementary science teachers’ enactment of a reform-based curricular unit. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25(4), 489-512.