Objectives

1. Recognize the importance of data gathering.

2. Identify the various data collection techniques and sources
of data.
3. Distinguish primary from secondary data sources.
4. Describe the various instruments for data gathering.
5. Cite the advantages of the use of such instruments.
6. Recognize the limitations of certain research instruments.
7. Design instruments for data gathering.
Data Collection Instruments for
Techniques Data Gathering
Use of Existing Reliability
Data
Questioning Validity
Interview

Opinionnaire
Observation
DATA COLLECTION AND
INSTRUMENTATION
 Use of Existing
Data
- know the various sources of existing data
Ex.
census data – PSA
statistics on health – DOH
employment statistics – DOLE
students attributes, characteristics - SCHOOL
Sources of
Data
Primary Sources
- provide information collected for the Secondary Sources
first time - data collected previously and
Ex. Newspaper stories, personal letters, reported by some individual
public documents, eyewitness, verbal - borrow the knowledge they contain
accounts… from other sources
 Advantages of Existing
Limitations
Data

o Definitions of variables may not

o Provide all the data needed instantly correspond to own definitions
o Save time and money o Difficult to dig private files
o Data provided are already tabulated o Difficulty in evaluating the quality of
data
 Questioning

- through the use of self-administered questionnaire or use of an interview schedule

- self-administered may be mailed or personally administered

Advantages of Questioning Limitations

o Less expensive to administer o The amount of information gathered
o Greater confidence of respondent’s is limited by the respondents
anonymity availability, time & interest span
o Less pressure of the respondents o Researcher cannot probe into a topic
if topic is unclear to the respondent
o Problem of return (mailed)
 Guidelines for the Formulation of Questions

1. Define or qualify terms that could easily be misinterpreted.

2. Beware of double negatives.
3. Be careful of inadequate alternatives.
4. Double-barreled questions should be avoided.
5. Underline a word if you wish to indicate special emphasis.
6. When asking fro ratings or comparisons, a point of reference is necessary.
7. Design questions that will give a complete response.
8. Phrase the questions so that they are appropriate for all respondents.
9. Questions must not suggest answers.

Questionnaire must be:

1. As short as possible Pretest the instrument
2. Attractive in appearance - try out to selected samples for
3. Instructions are clear modifications and revisions
4. Easy to understand
 Interview

- face-to-face interaction between two persons

- interviewer- one who asks questions
- interviewee/respondent- the one who supplies the information asked for
- interview schedule- formal list of questions used in the interview

3 Basic Types of
Interview

Scheduled- Nonscheduled
structured Nonscheduled- - Does not use pre-
- Uses an instrument in structured specified set of
which the questions are - Uses only guide questions
identical for every questions for the - No direction from the
respondent interview interviewer
 Guidelines for Interview

1. First establish rapport with the respondent.

2. If a scheduled-structured interview is used, ask the question precisely as specified
in the schedule.
3. Conducted in an informal and relaxed atmosphere.
4. Questions that are misinterpreted or misunderstood should be repeated and
clarified.
5. Responses should be recorded exactly as stated.
6. Thank the respondent and make an appointment for a possible call back.
 Opinionnaire

- an instrument that measured attitude or belief of an individual

SEMANTIC DIFFERENTIAL SCALE

LIKERT SCALE
- find the meanings that objects and
- another measurement of attitudes,
people possess
feelings and behavior
- consists of: number of paired
- most commonly used attitude scale in
adjectives, opposite in meaning, with
educational research
seven blanks between them
SEMANTIC DIFFERENTIAL SCALE
Determine the students’ attitudes toward mathematics.

Direction: Complete each statement by using the descriptors. Mark √ (check) on

the part of the scale which closely matches your description.

AS A MATHEMATICS STUDENT, I AM

Industrious √
___:___:___:___:___:___:___: Lazy
Interested ___:___:___:___:___:___:___:
√ Bored
Passive √ Active
___:___:___:___:___:___:___:
Illogical √
___:___:___:___:___:___:___: Logical
Well-behaved √
___:___:___:___:___:___:___: Disorderly

The above answer mean you are not very lazy, generally
interested, very active, not very illogical, and very well-behaved.
LIKERT SCALE

ATTITUDES TOWARD MATHEMATICS

Directions: Read each statement carefully. Write
SA : if you STRONGLY AGREE with the statement,
A : if you AGREE with the statement,
U : if you are UNCERTAIN,
D : if you DISAGREE with the statement,
SD : if you STRONGLY DISAGREE with the statement.
Write your response on the separate answer sheet provided.

1. Mathematics is a subject I am afraid of.

2. When I work with mathematics problems, my thinking and reasoning are
sharpened.
3. I feel excited learning mathematics.
4. Learning mathematics makes me feel bored.
5. Mathematics is the subject I greatly enjoy.
Observation

- process whereby researcher watches the research situation

- used when respondents are unwilling to express themselves verbally
- most appropriately used in researches involving teaching-learning conditions,
interactions, physical behavior, group interaction
- researcher records the observation as seen and heard (senses)

Guidelines

Advantages & Limitations

Methods
 Guidelines

1. The observation scheme must be carefully planned.

2. The observer must be objective.
3. The observer must be able to separate facts from interpretation of the facts.
4. Observations must be carefully and expertly recorded.
Advantages

1. Most direct means of studying a wide variety of phenomena.

2. Less subjects under observation, permits recording of data.

Limitations

1. People deliberately try to create favorable or unfavorable impressions when

they know they are being observed.
2. Limited by the duration of events.
3. There are unforeseeable factors such as weather conditions that may
interfere with observational tasks.
 Methods

SCALE
TESTS
- set of symbols or numerals so
- systematic procedure in which
constructed that the symbols or
individual tested is presented
numerals can be assigned by
with a set of constructed stimuli
rule to the individuals (or
to which he responds
behavior) to whom the scale is
- ex. intelligence tests, aptitude
applied
tests, achievement tests and
- ex. attitude scale like Likert
personality tests
scale, Thurnstones scale (equal-
appearing interval scales),
Guttman scale (cumulative)
 Reliability

- estimates of the degree to which a measurement is free of random or unstable

error
- the extent to which a test is dependable, stable and self-consistent
- high degree of reliability means good measurement and evaluation

3 Approaches to Reliability

Stability Equivalence Internal Consistency

 Example
Stability
Student Score on the 1st Score on the 2nd
administration administration
- one can secure consistent results 1 74 78
with repeated measurements of 2 56 51
the same person with the same 3 87 87
instrument 4 90 92
- Method: TEST-RETEST 5 76 80
6 66 69
- same test or instrument is
7 83 88
administered twice to the same
8 92 95
group of subjects
9 75 75
10 80 82

Reliability Indices & Interpretation: - Correlation is 0.98 which mean the

0.6 and above Reliable test is reliable.
Below 0.6 Not reliable
Limitations

1. In case when the time interval is short, the subjects may recall his
previous responses and this tends to make the correlation coefficient
high.
2. In case when the time interval is long, such factors as unlearning,
forgetting, and so on, may occur and result in low correlation of the test.
3. Regardless of the time interval between the two test administrations,
environmental conditions such as temperature, lightning, and noise may
affect the correlation of the instrument.
 Equivalence

- how much error may be introduced by different investigators (in observations)

or different samples of items being studied (in questioning or scales)
- major interest is how well a given set of items will categorize individuals
- GOOD EQUIVALENCY if a person is classified the same way by each test
- Method: PARALLEL FORMS (ALTERNATE/EQUIVALENT FORMS)
- administered to the group of subjects
- criteria parallelism – two forms of the test must be constructed so
that the content type of item, difficulty, instructions for administration
are similar but not identical
- ex. Convert 3,000 grams to kilograms (Form A)
Convert 3 kilograms to grams (Form B)
Internal Consistency

- only one administration of a test in order to assess consistency or homogeneity

among the items

Methods

Cronbach’s
Split-Half
Kuder- Coefficient
Method
Richardson Alpha
Method
1. K-R 20
2. K-R 21
 Split-Half
Method

- used when the measuring tool has many similar statements or questions to
which the subject can respond
- after the administration, results are separated by item into even & odd numbers
or into two randomly selected halves
- highly reliable when correlation coefficient is very high
- SPEARMAN-BROWN PROPHECY FORMULA – used to correct or
adjust for the effect of test length & to estimate the reliability of the whole test

where,
rw = the correlation for the whole test
rh = the correlation between the two halves of the test
 Kuder-
Richardson
Methods

- most widely accepted methods for estimating reliability

- Give a test once then correlate the percentage of the students passing and not
passing a given item.

KUDER-RICHARDSON KUDER-RICHARDSON FORMULA 21

FORMULA 20 (K-R 20) (K-R 21)
- advisable to use if the p values - advisable to use if the items do not
(proportion of correct vary much in difficulty
responses to a particular item) - p values (proportion of correct
vary a lot responses to a particular item) are
more or less similar
 KUDER-RICHARDSON KUDER-RICHARDSON FORMULA
FORMULA 20 (K-R 20) 21 (K-R 21)

where,
n = the number of test items
Σ = summation where,
p = the proportion of correct n = the number of test items
responses to a particular item X = the mean score of the test
q = 1-p s2 = the variance of the scores of the
s2 = the variance of the scores on test
the test
 Cronbach’s
Coefficient
Alpha

- applicable to multiple scores tests – where,

those that are not scored right or wrong, n = the number of test items
but, respondent receive a different si2 = the variance of a single test
numerical score on an item depending on item
his choice: “Strongly Agree”, “A”, “U”, “D”, s2 = the variance of the scores on
“SD” the test
- advisable for: essay items, problem
solving, five-scaled items (Likert),
semantic differential scale
Increasing Reliability

- external sources of variation are minimized & the conditions are standardized

Lists that affect reliability:

1. The coefficient will be greater for…
2. The coefficient will be lower for…
The coefficient will be greater for…

1. A long test.
2. A test over homogeneous content rather than heterogeneous content.
3. A set of scores from a group of examinees with a wide ability range that
causes a wide achievement score range rather than from a group that has
members much alike.
4. A test composed of well-written and appropriate items.
5. Measures with few scoring errors than for measures that vary from test to test
or paper to paper because of scoring procedure alone.
6. Test scores obtained by proper conditions for testing and students with
optimum motivation.
 The coefficient will be lower for…

1. A test that is too short.

2. Content that is heterogeneous.
3. A test of poorly written items.
4. A test with poor format.
5. Poor testing conditions.
6. Many items of very low or very high difficulty.
7. A test that has been scored with many errors.
8. A low level of motivation for examinees.
 Validity

- the extent to which it measures what it claims to measure

- inferences made from it are appropriate, meaningful and useful

3 categories

Construct
Content
Validity
Validity
Criterion-
related
Validity
 Content
Validity

- degree to which the questions, and items on a test

are representative of the universe of behavior the
test was designed to sample
- if the specified items on the test is representative of
all possible items, the test is valid
 Criterion-
related
Validity

- ability of the test to predict performance on another measure

- predicting future performance
Ex. CMUCAT Score
- used to select students for admission to the university
- used to predict the likelihood of succeeding in college
 CONCURRENT VALIDITY STUDIES
PREDICTIVE VALIDITY STUDIES
- the correlation between test
- criterion measure is obtained in
scores and a current criterion
the future
measure is determined
- a relevant criterion for a college
- Ex. – if we want to find out if
entrance examination would be
CMUCAT predicts college GPA,
the freshmen-year grade point
correlate CMUCAT scores with
average
GPA
 Construct
Validity

- appropriateness of the inferences about the underlying construct

- CONSTRUCT – intangible quality/trait in which individuals differ
(mathematics, teacher, school)
- constructs are inferred from behavior, attitudes and feelings
- psychological traits that theoretically influences scores
 Face
Validity

- done by examining the physical appearance of the instrument

- valid to test users, examiners and especially the examinees