The Construct

The construct refers to the concept of intended measure in this study. Mindful of the literature, the factors used in assessing the perceived ability of an individual PST are assumed to psychometrically measure one construct of self-efficacy in teaching science using science inquiry skills. The construct outcome intends to become a self- belief assessment that infers competence in teaching science using science inquiry skills in the new curriculum.

Based on the curriculum used for BoTP, the study construct was arranged to represent a hypothesised level of the self-efficacy of the respondents from early admission to the end of the programme. It derived from the concept of teacher knowledge in the PSTs’ education. At the early stage in the PSTs’ education, a PST constructs belief in the effectiveness of using science inquiry skills from their school experiences. The beliefs are used to strengthen the knowledge learned (i.e. content knowledge and pedagogical knowledge) during the training programme. Then, by reinforcing belief and knowledge, PSTs are able to craft personal practices in classroom teaching (Abd-el-khalick, Bell and Lederman, 1997; Magnusson, Krajcia and Borko, 1999; Veal and MaKinster, 1999b; Cochran-Smith, 2004; Veal, 2012). Thus, my hypothesis is that the level of self-efficacy in using science inquiry skills when teaching science follows the hierarchy order from traits related to OBE up to traits related to KE to the top with traits related to PTE (i.e. from low level to high level). The order represents the framework of my measurement model, which is used to estimate responses for the construct development.

In summary, the traits from the three factors describe the development of teacher knowledge embedded along the construct continuum. For instance, the KE factor consists of relevant items in assessing traits in the science inquiry skills knowledge. The PTE factor characterises assessments that are relevant to assessing responses in terms of traits in the ability of personal practice in teaching using science inquiry skills in the science classroom. The OBE factor assesses traits of perceived

responses that are relevant to the capability of believing in the effectiveness of knowledge of science inquiry skills in learning science. As a whole, the perceived capabilities in the traits measured from the three factors represent the construct’s concept of self-efficacy in teaching science using science inquiry skills.

Respondents’ positions in the framework are described based on their responses to the factors. Hypothetically, the estimation of responses in the construct characterise the level of self-efficacy of an individual PST. Various confident degrees of

responses within the three factors define the development in self-efficacy in teaching science using science inquiry skills. Different degrees of confidence in responses given in the items note the depth of the perceived abilities held by an individual PST within the three factors. The combination of responses in the three factors’ traits establish layers of perceived abilities to teach science using science inquiry skills in the SETSIS. Characteristics that emerge from this complex combination of

responses determine the outcome measured along the construct continuum. The outcomes are characterised in the level of self-efficacy in teaching science using science inquiry skills, which are clarified as the construct outcomes. I will now describe these levels of outcomes in detail using the construct map.

4.3.1 The Construct Map

The construct map (Brown and Wilson, 2011) visualises the hypothesis on the level of teaching using science inquiry skills model maps across the three factors. Figure 6 shows the relations of the item hierarchy between the three factors mapped on

overall development around the theme of teaching using science inquiry skills. The model hypothesises response outcomes divided into descriptive levels of self-

efficacy in teaching science using science inquiry skills. The descriptive levels would give clear guidance in creating suitable assessments to measure the intended

construct. It helps in establishing construct validity during the process of developing the SETSIS especially in designing items and developing the model.

Figure 6 Construct map for the SETSIS development

The construct map visualises a measurement framework from the hypothesised model of progression on self-efficacy in teaching science using science inquiry skills. It is drawn on the proposed estimation order of the factors that are developed by PSTs during teacher education training. The order (from the bottom to the top: OBE→ KE→PTE) is then descriptively fabricated into the measurement framework. The relationship between estimations of responses to items and the outcomes level on the continuum of self-efficacy in the construct is drawn in Figure 6.

The self-efficacy in the construct continuum is described and defined with five qualitatively distinct levels with the bidirectional arrow in Figure 6 representing greater and fewer amounts of self-efficacy as per the measure. The PST with the lowest response to self-efficacy in the construct measure is defined as not perceiving

Respondent Direction Responses to items Interpretation to construct

high responsses for average to affirm items in OBE

L1- perceived ability to recognise effectiveness SIS in science classroom

Direction of decreasing potential ability of using SIS in

teaching science

high responses for easy to affirm items in OBE

high responses for;

difficult to affirm items in OBE and easy to affirm items in KE

L2- perceived ability to promote good influence of SIS in teaching science classroom

High responses for

difficult to affirm items in OBE, difficult to affirm items in KE, and difficult to affirm items in PTE Direction of

increasing potential ability of using SIS in

teaching science

L5- perceived ability to adapt SIS in method and strategies in science classroom teaching to enhance student learning

high responses for;

difficult to affirm items in OBE, difficult to affirm items in KE, and average to affirm items in PTE

L4-perceived ability to enhance knowledge bases on using more SIS in teaching science classroom

high responses for;

difficult to affirm items in OBE, average to affirm items in KE and easy to affirm items in PTE

L3- perceived ability to use SIS in teaching science classroom

any confidence in personal ability, as represented by the traits of the three factors. The self-efficacy of PST increases by increment with perceived confidence in personal ability according to the traits of the factors. Complex responses in the factors are cumulated and described in five levels representing the continuum of self- efficacy in the single construct.

The continuum level is important for positioning and interpreting a PST’s self-efficacy in teaching science using science inquiry skills. With low cumulative responses in OBE, KE and PTE, a PST is placed at the bottom level of self-efficacy in the construct map. Showing high affirmation of items that indicate low belief in the outcomes of science inquiry skills in science learning, low ability in knowledge of teaching science inquiry skills and low ability in practicing teaching using science inquiry skills in classroom, a PST is hypothesised as having ability in recognising science inquiry skills learning but with low possibility of using the SIS knowledge when teaching classroom science. Thus, the bottom level of the construct map is described as level one (L1) with a perceived ability in recognising effectiveness of

science inquiry skills in learning, which reflects the lowest self-efficacy in teaching

science using science inquiry skills.

Level two (L2) from the bottom of the construct defines self-efficacy with high affirmations of items that indicate high ability in OBE but low in KE and PTE. L2 describe respondents with high belief in the effectiveness of science inquiry skills outcomes but without confidence in their ability in the knowledge of teaching science inquiry skills and ability of practicing teaching using science inquiry skills in the classroom. In the construct measure, L2 is mapped as self-efficacy in promoting

good influence of using science inquiry skills in teaching science.

Level three (L3) of the construct defines self-efficacy with high affirmation of items that indicate high ability in OBE, average ability in KE and low ability in PTE. At L3, a respondent is described as showing good belief in the benefit of using science

inquiry skills in learning with confidence in their basic knowledge of science inquiry skills to teach but, still not confident in their ability in teaching science using science inquiry skills in the classroom. In the construct map, L3 is characterised as having

self-efficacy in using science inquiry skills in teaching classroom science.

Level four (L4) of the construct defines self-efficacy with high affirmations of items that indicate high ability in OBE and KE but average ability in PTE. At L4, a

respondent is hypothesised with good belief in the benefits of science inquiry skills with sufficient knowledge of science inquiry skills to complete learning goals or solve teaching problems in the classroom. However, the personal practice confidence at this level may come through reflections afterwards. On measuring the self-efficacy,

the L4 is mapped as having potential to enhance the knowledge bases and using

more science inquiry skills in teaching classroom science.

Level five (L5) of the construct is the top layer that defines the self-efficacy with high affirmations of items that indicate high ability in the three factors: OBE, KE and PTE. At L5, a respondent is hypothesised as possessing definite confidence in the belief in the good learning outcomes from using science inquiry skills, confidence in their knowledge of science inquiry skills and confidence in their capability of practicing science inquiry skills in teaching classroom science. Their belief has enhanced the knowledge of science inquiry skills with the possibility of using the instructional method that stimulates science learning. In the construct map, the L5 is mapped as having potential to adapt science inquiry skills in teaching science and enhance

students’ learning by using science inquiry skills.

In summary, the construct map represents an explicit model of the SETSIS. The construct five layers mapped the order of the hypothesised responses across the three factors. The pre-specified orders reflect the development of self-efficacy in teaching using science inquiry skills as it corresponds to the different hierarchy of items. The theoretical concept of the construct manifested in practice with the item hierarchy design will now be discussed.