Data Collection Instruments Sample Clauses

Data Collection Instruments. The qualitative data collection instruments consisted of one FGD guide (service providers) and five KI guides, including: (1) country resource persons and focal point persons/champions at target facilities; (2) MOH policymakers; (3) CAs and development partners; (4) VFCP facilitators; and (5) global stakeholders. The FGD guides were pre-tested at one facility in each country and necessary corrections were made (KI and FGD guide: xxxx://xxx.x0xxxxxxxx.xxx/publications-tools/pac-fp-assessment-tools- english.html).

Data Collection Instruments. Two structured questionnaires was used to elicit data from Nairobi city county education department officer on assessment of devolved governance system in management of education in Nairobi City County. For retrospective data, desk reviews used to assess the relevant of the existing policies and laws, from education sector Nairobi City County 2014. Validity is often defined as the extent to which an instrument measures what it purports to measure (AM J Health pharm- volume1, 2008). According to Xxxxxxx (2005) validity is the degree to which results obtained from the analysis of the actually represent the element under study. Therefore it is the degree to which the instrument truly measures what it is intended to measure. In other words, validity ensures content, construct and criterion related validity in the study. Xxxxxxx and mugenda (2008) advocate that the pre-test sample should be 1% to 10% depending on sample size. In this study, a pilot study was carried on 18 who were not be included in the final study. Xxxxxxx, (2005) defines reliability as the consistency of measurement, or degree to which an instrument measures the same way each time it is used under the same conditions with the same subjects. In this study, test- retest method will be used to estimate the degree to which same results could be obtained with a repeated measure. To gauge reliability, the instruments will be administered twice within a time interval of two weeks. The respondents used during pre-testing exercise will not be included in the final sample. Questionnaires will then be reviewed on the basis of the responses obtained.

Data Collection Instruments. ‌ The Investigator will prepare and maintain adequate and accurate source documents designed to record all observations and other pertinent data for each subject who signs informed consent. Study personnel at each site will enter data from source documents corresponding to a subject’s visit into the protocol-specific electronic CRF when the information corresponding to that visit is available. Subjects will not be identified by name in the study database or on any study documents to be collected by the Sponsor (or designee), but will be identified by a site number, subject number and initials. If a correction is required for a CRF, the time and date stamp tracks the person entering or updating CRF data and create an electronic audit trail. The Investigator is responsible for all information collected on subjects enrolled in this study. All data collected during the course of this study must be reviewed and verified for completeness and accuracy by the Investigator. A CD containing the CRF data will be provided to the site to be retained with the essential documents at the Investigator’s site at the completion of the study.

Data Collection Instruments. The Save the Children team designed and produced six types of instruments for the purpose of collecting relevant data from key informants at the school and MOE levels. These instruments were validated for content prior to use by experts at both Save the Children and RTI. These instruments included: • Classroom observation checklist, which gathered general information on the classroom, student engagement, teacher-student interactions, and use of active teaching techniques. • School observation tool, which gathered general data on student numbers, available school supplies, library hours, etc. • Student questionnaire, which gathered student background data, student ratings of classroom learning culture and teaching methods, perceptions of barriers to learning, and information related to gender and children with disabilities. • Teacher questionnaire, which gathered teacher background data, including pre- and in-service training, understanding of theory in teaching reading and writing, teachers’ self-evaluation of their classroom practice in teaching reading and writing, and questions on diverse related issues, like support systems, barriers to teaching/learning, parental collaboration, resources, and gender/disability in the classroom. • Focus group discussion protocols, which were developed for students, teachers and representatives of the Woreda Education Offices, Zonal Education Departments, Regional Education Bureaus and MOE on reading and writing in Mother Tongue and English. Discussions with adults lasted approximately two hours, while the student discussions lasted about one hour. XXX staff responded in writing to the questionnaire because they lacked time to sit for face-to-face discussions. • Interview protocols. Unique protocols were created for interviews with each of the following: parents, PTA members, and school directors. Interviews were used to gather additional qualitative data on issues relevant to reading and writing in Mother Tongue and English. Interviews with parents and PTA members were shorter, lasting between 15 and 30 minutes; interviews with school directors lasted between one and one and a half hours. In order to collect rich data from all 56 schools in the allotted time, consultants hired by Save the Children employed seven graduate students from the Addis Ababa area as data collection supervisors. Each supervisor had at least a Master’s level of education (most were PhD candidates), was nominated by a respected professor, and was...

Data Collection Instruments. The data collection involved two distinct phases. In the first, phase quantitative sampling was completed. In the second phase the purposeful sampling help to recruit a number of teachers to participate in the collection of qualitative data. The survey was used as the quantitative data collection instrument in this study. 30 Likert scale survey questions were used to identify teachers’ attitudes towards the motivational environment in the school as well the job satisfaction level of teachers. The survey had three sections. The first section asked teachers to rate how important certain factors are for their teaching motivation. The second section focused on participants’ attitude towards motivation at the school, and they were asked to indicate whether they strongly agree, agree, disagree and strongly disagree with the given statements. The full survey can be found in Appendix B. The questions were adapted from Kassabgy, Boraie & Xxxxxxx (2001). According to Xxxxx and Xxxx (2005), there are three reasons to consider a survey as an effective tool to collect data. Firstly, it helps to eliminate the pressure that might occur during face to face interviews. Secondly, it allows for the collection of opinions from a wide range of participants, and lastly, it reduces the bias of interviewers during verbal interviewing (Xxxxx & Xxxx, 2005). Likert scale survey questions was used to identify teachers’ attitudes towards the motivational environment in school as well job satisfaction level of teachers. The qualitative data collection tool chosen for the study was face to face interviews, which was open-ended and semi-structured and include 10-15 questions. The interviews lasted 15-25 minutes. Xxxxxxxx (2014) points out that quantitative data defines what sampling technique to apply to collect qualitative data, and it helps to develop interview questions that are used during the second phase. Therefore, the interview questions were based on data derived from the survey. The survey analysis showed some frequent highly rated responses which were chosen to be discussed during interviewing phase. Even though basic questions were used to start the interview, due to the semi-structured nature the interviewer had some flexibility to ask follow-up questions during interviews. Full interview questions can be found in Appendix C. Some interview questions included: 1. Why did you choose to become a teacher? 2. Do you think you are a motivated/de-motivated teacher? Why (What facto...

Data Collection Instruments. In addition to the researcher, the interview, which consisted of open-ended questions, was an essential component of this study. Xxx (2003) states that case studies may gather data using a variety of methods, including questionnaires, interviews, observations, and written reports from the individuals. The purpose of using in-depth interviews in this study was to get a vivid picture of the participant's opinion on the study issue (Xxxxxx, Xxxxxx & Xxxx, 2008). Further, semi-structured interviews allowed me to obtain a clear image of teachers’ adaptive learning experiences in gifted education while allowing for follow-up and investigative inquiries.

Data Collection Instruments. The Contractor shall develop and pretest data collection instruments with program participants, authorized vendors, State and/or local agency staff, and other project personnel or implementing partners to enable an evaluation that measures the implementation progress and impact of the modernization projects on participants, in accordance with the objectives and research questions. The Contractor shall pretest any new instruments prior to data collection. Expected deliverables for this task include all required data collection instruments, recruitment materials, and a pretest memorandum.

Data Collection Instruments. ‌ Xxxxxx-Xxxxxxxxxx, Xxxxxxxx, Xxxxxxxx, Xxxxxxxxxx and Xxxxx (2018) used a survey instrument with questions focusing on each type of PVRC bullying and sub-questions helping to distinguish bullying perpetrators and victims. It consists of four statements where each statement describes one type of PVRC bullying with following sub questions (for example: How often do you do this?) to which students answer using the scale from 0 (never) to 5 (all of the time). Additionally, they investigated differences in bullying victimization and perpetration based on gender (Xxxxxx-Xxxxxxxxxx et al., 2018). Similarly, when exploring PVRC bullying, the present study has duplicated the study conducted by Xxxxxx-Xxxxxxxxxx et al (2018) and used the data collection instrument developed by them. In addition to the variables of the research study mentioned above, the current study investigated ethnicity, language of instruction, academic performance and residence and determined if there was any relationship between these variables. Due to the fact that there is a lack of tools to measure bullying in Kazakh or Russian, the present study used the above mentioned tool and was guided with the strategy of Xxxxx and Xxxxxx’s (2018) study, when researchers translated existing scale, which is the Child-Adolescent Teasing Scale (CATS), and adapted it for Turkish context. The participants in this study are highly competent in English. However, in order to avoid any language barrier and possible misunderstandings, the present study followed translation procedures such as back-translation method and made necessary revisions for unclear expressions.

Data Collection Instruments. ‌ An electronic data capture system will be utilized for collection of study data. The Investigator will prepare and maintain adequate and accurate source documents designed to record all observations and other pertinent data for each subject who signs informed consent. Study personnel at each site will enter data from source documents corresponding to a subject’s visit into the protocol-specific CRFs when the information corresponding to that visit is available. Subjects will not be identified by name in the study database or on any study documents to be collected by the sponsor (or designee), but will be identified by a site number, subject number and initials. If a correction is required for a CRF, the time and date stamp tracks the person entering or updating CRF data and creates an electronic audit trail. The Investigator is responsible for all information collected on subjects enrolled in this study. All data collected during the course of this study must be reviewed and verified for completeness and accuracy by the Investigator. A copy of the CRF will remain at the Investigator’s site at the completion of the study.

Data Collection Instruments. ‌ Data collection instruments used in this study are survey and semi-structured interviews. For the collection of the quantitative data, the survey is utilized, whereas for the qualitative data semi-structured interviews have been considered as the most suitable. To gather quantitative data, a questionnaire with close-ended questions has been employed to explore the influence of the year of schooling in a trilingual educational program and level of proficiency in Kazakh, Russian and English on respondents’ national identity and their attitude towards the national language. The findings derived from the surveys can present “a general picture of the research problem” (Xxxxxxxx, 2014, p. 572). Then, the semi-structured interviews as a means to collect the qualitative data “extend the general picture” and examine the process of shaping Kazakh students’ identities (Xxxxxxxx, 2014, p. 572). The questionnaire survey (see Appendix A) includes questions on the background information of the students and main questions on national identity and national language employing the five-point Likert scale (Xxxxx, 2008) that are designed in NU Qualtrics. These close-ended questions have been used to elicit students’ agreement with different statements about trilingual education, identity and role of the Kazakh language. The questionnaires include five scale answers (strongly disagree, disagree, neutral, agree, and strongly agree) to reveal their attitude towards trilingual education and national language. This scale enables observation of the extent to which they agree or disagree with particular items on trilingual education. The survey was conducted via NU Qualtrics online as “electronic data collection provides an easy, quick for of data collection” (Xxxxxxxx, 2014, p. 174). The link to complete the survey was sent to the participants and it did not include the information that could identify the individuals. At the end of the survey, there is a question on the possibility of a participant to take the participation further in the interview, and if “yes”, there is a place for inserting a phone number. After the researcher read all the responses, six participants from those who agreed were chosen based on their answers. For example, if the researcher sees that the particular participant’s answers reveal that his/her identity is more influenced by different mediums of instruction, and these participants agreed to continue, they would be contacted for conducting the interview...