3.4 MEASURING INSTRUMENT AND DATA ANALYSIS
The measuring instrument used to collect the primary data and to measure the variables for this study was a questionnaire. Questionnaires are associated with both the positivistic and phenomenological methodologies. Questionnaires are made up of a list of carefully structured questions which are chosen after considerable testing with a view to eliciting reliable responses from a chosen sample. The aim of the questionnaire is to find out what the respondents think, do or feel as this will help to address the research questions (Collis & Hussey, 2009: 191 – 192).
The questionnaire used in this study consists of four sections, A to D. The statements in section A test the performance of an SGB in carrying out its duties as stipulated in SASA on a 6-point Likert scale ranging from (1) I don’t know to (6) strongly agree. Section B requires information about the school academic performance for the year 2012 from grade 8 to grade 12. Section C requires respondents to rate school performance on certain functions according to the SASA on a 6-point Likert scale ranging from (1) extremely weak to (6) excellent. Section D relates to the demographic data of the respondents. Section A of the questionnaire consists of 29 statements structured under certain themes. Statements 1 to 6 test whether the SGB members understand and know the school and its extra-curricular activities.
55
Statements 7 and 8 test the involvement and participation of the SGB in academic and disciplinary affairs of the school. Statements 9 to 16 test formulation, adoption and implementation of school policies in accordance with the SASA. Statements 17 and 18 test the support that the SGB provides to the school. Statements 19 to 29 test performance of various SGB functions as in SASA.
In section C of the questionnaire the respondents were asked to rate their schools under certain variables/issues. The variables for which the respondents are expected to rate the performance of their schools are quality of teaching and learning; utilisation of resources; school governance; learner conduct and discipline; community engagement; extra-mural activities (cultural); extra-mural activities (sport); extra-mural activities (education); senior management team (SMT) leadership; professionalism of staff; staff morale and motivation.
3.5 THE RELIABILITY OF THE MEASURING INSTRUMENT
Reliability refers to the absence of differences in the results if the research is repeated. For a research result to be reliable, a repeat study should produce the same result. According to Collis and Hussey (2009), although reliability tends to be high in positivist studies, under an interpretive paradigm, reliability is often of little importance. The researchers explain further that the qualitative measures do not need to be reliable in the positivist sense, that implies therefore that in a positivistic study, reliability is high and in a phenomenological study reliability is low (Collis & Hussey, 2009: 64). Also according to Wahyuni (2012), reliability refers to the consistency of measures, and measurement consistency facilitates the replication or the repeatability of a study (Wahyuni, 2012: 77).
According to Collis and Hussey (2009), there are three common ways of estimating the reliability of the responses to questions in the questionnaire. The test re-test method – where the respondents are asked to answer the same questions but on two separate occasions. Responses for the two occasions are correlated and the correlation co-efficient of the two sets of data computed, thus providing an index of reliability. This method is used to determine the extent to which the instrument yields the same results on two different occasions.
56
divided into two equal halves. That can be done by putting the responses to the odd numbered questions in one pile and the responses to the even numbered questions in another pile. The two piles are then correlated and the correlation co-efficient of the two sets of data are computed. The internal consistency method means that here every item is correlated with every other item across the sample and the average inter-item correlation is taken as the index of reliability (Collis & Hussey, 2009: 204- 206).
The respondents in the present study were required to respond to questions anchored on a Likert-scale and, according to Cook (2009), Cronbach's coefficient alpha is an ideal measuring instrument. Also, the sample size for the present study is small, less than 200, therefore the reliability coefficients for the tests used should be given. The reliability coefficient calculations examine the inter-correlations among test items and the closer the Cronbach's coefficient alpha to 1.00, the higher the instrument's internal consistency and reliability (Cook, 2009: 115).
It has also been suggested by Arnolds and Boshoff (2001: 40) that a Cronbach alpha of 0.50 for basic research has been regarded as acceptable in many research studies and also an instrument that produces a reliability coefficient of more than 0.70 is regarded as a reliable instrument. The measuring instrument consists of multiple test items and could therefore measure their alpha values. The Cronbach alpha values of the measuring instrument are listed in the table below as:
TABLE 3.6: CRONBACH ALPHA VALUES OF MEASURING INSTRUMENT