| The purpose of this study was to develop a Technology-Integrated Learning Environments Survey (TILES) instrument to assess prospective science teachers' perceptions of their online learning environments and to provide psychometric evidence of validity and reliability for the instrument.;First, the original draft instrument development started with defining the three constructs of pedagogy, technology, and practice from the hypothetical Technology-Integrated Learning Environments model. Second, 63 initial items with a five-point Likert-type scale were generated to represent the three constructs. Third, each of the initial items was reviewed for clarity and appropriateness of item content by an expert panel consisting of one faculty and four graduate students in science education. Fourth, based on the panel's judgments, 40 items were selected for the first draft instrument and revised to clearly represent the contents of the corresponding construct. Fifth, the first instrument was administered to 43 prospective elementary science teachers in two sections of SCIED 458-Teaching Elementary School Science at The Pennsylvania State University at the end (14th week) of spring semester 2000. Sixth, item analysis was conducted to select internally consistent items constituting each of the pedagogy, technology, and practice constructs. Seventh, internal consistency reliability was assessed across the three constructs.;The second draft instrument development started with the extension of the Technology-Integrated Learning Environments model to fit online communications learning environments in prospective science teacher education. An online communications learning environment was hypothesized to have a hierarchical structure in that two underlying subconstructs resided in each of the three constructs: reflection and collaboration in pedagogy, multiple ideas and time flexibility in technology, and feedback and autonomy in practice. At the eighth step of the TILES instrument development, the six subconstructs were defined for the second draft items. Ninth, the second draft items were generated by rewording the remaining 23 items to reflect the corresponding subconstruct. Meanwhile, the nine items among them were dropped and 31 items were added to form 45 items. Tenth, each of the items was evaluated for its adequacy to reflect the intended content domain and the clarity of the items by an expert panel consisting of one faculty and four graduate students in science education. Eleventh, some items were revised to accurately represent the content of each, based on the expert panel's evaluation. Twelfth, the second draft instrument was administered at the end (15th week) of fall semester 2000 to 187 prospective science teachers, including 162 elementary majors in five sections of SCIED 458-Teaching Elementary School Science and 25 secondary majors in one section of SCIED 411-Teaching Secondary School Science. Thirteenth, an item analysis was conducted to select internally consistent items reflecting the same underlying subconstruct out of six. Fourteenth, internal consistency reliability was measured. Finally, the last items were applied to a construct-related validity study. (Abstract shortened by UMI.)... |
