EMPIRICAL RESEARCH
TABLE 4.6: SUB-SCALE CONTENTS OF THE ALSDS (BOTHA, 2013)
Self-directedness scale factors
Question number
Questionnaire items
Strategic utilisation of officially provided resources
Q 3 According to the credits they carry, how many hours are you required to devote to each module per week?
Q 7 When do you read tutorial letters?
Q 8 When do you use your study guide?
Q 9 How do you use the feedback tutorial letters in your studies?
Q 19 How much information have you collected about open distance learning?
Example of behaviourally anchored scale format:
According to the credits they carry, how many hours are you required to devote to each module per week?
1 2 3 4
I don’t know One to two Two to three Three to four
Engaged academic activity
Q 1 How many hours per week do you devote to your Unisa studies?
Q 2 How much time do you devote to each module/course per week?
Q 4 How do you plan your study time?
Q 5 When do you submit assignments?
Q 6 How much time do you allow
yourself to prepare for examinations?
Example of behaviourally anchored scale format:
How many hours per week do you devote to your Unisa studies?
1 2 3 4
Self-directedness scale factors
Question number
Questionnaire items
Less than one One to two Two to three Three to four More than four
Success orientation for open distance learning
Q 10 Which of the following describes the learning situation in which you are most comfortable?
Q 11 What do you do when you experience a problem such as a family crisis or unexpected heavy workload and are not able to submit an assignment on time?
Q 12 How would you describe your most preferred mode of study?
Q 13 How will you use the knowledge you have gained in your studies in your work situation?
Q 14 How confident are you that you will understand the learning material?
Q 15 How confident are you that you will master all the learning outcomes of your field of study?
Q 16 How confident are you that you will complete your qualification?
Q 17 How confident are you that you will be able to solve problems you encounter in your learning?
Q 18 How confident are you that you possess the skills necessary to cope in an ODL environment?
Q 20 How do you find studying in an open distance learning environment
Q 21 Who do you think is responsible for ensuring your success as a student?
Self-directedness scale factors
Question number
Questionnaire items
Example of behaviourally anchored scale format:
Which of the following describes the learning situation in which you are the most comfortable? factors but am able to study at my own pace, have not received all the tutorial letters?
Q 24 What do you do when you encounter words or phrases in the prescribed book, study guide or tutorial letters that you do not understand?
Q 25 What do you do when you do not understand what is required in an assignment question?
Q 26 Why did you decide to study?
Q 27 What motivates you to study?
Q 28 Why do you use the study guide?
Q 29 How do you use the study guide?
Self-directedness sources and access to technology such as computers and the internet?
Q 33 How do you prepare for examinations?
Q 34 What do you do when you realise you have not worked sufficiently throughout the year/semester and are unprepared for the examination?
Q 35 What do you do when you want to improve your knowledge and skills?
Example of behaviourally anchored scale format:
What do you do when you struggle to understand the work?
1 2 3 4
I become discouraged and stop working
I contact a friend for assistance
I contact the lecturer for assistance
I read through the material again and, if I
still do not
understand, I contact the lecturer
4.2.2.4 Administration and interpretation of the ALSDS
The ALSDS is a self-reporting questionnaire which is administered individually and which should not take more than 20 minutes to complete. However, it is not necessary to impose a time limit on the respondents. The respondents are requested to answer each question as quickly and honestly as possible by selecting the behaviour or attitude described on each scale that most accurately describes their behaviour or attitude as regards that question. The respondents are required to read both the question and the behaviours related to each of the
35 items and then choose the option or options that most accurately describe(s) their study behaviour or attitude. Twenty-one of the questions require one response only per question, while the remaining questions allow for more than one response per question. The instrument may be administered to individuals and to groups. Detailed instructions are provided on the questionnaire, thus ensuring that the questionnaire is self-explanatory and, thus, that no supervision is required.
Each respondent’s assessment is scored electronically. The total scale scores are calculated by adding all the items for each subscale. The scores may range from 35 to 70; the higher the score, the higher the respondent’s self-directedness for open distance learning.
4.2.2.5 Validity and reliability of the ALSDS
The results of the Exploratory Factor Analyses, as discussed in chapter 5, revealed that the ALSDS items satisfy the psychometric criteria of both content and construct validity. The internal consistency reliability of the ALSDS was determined using the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient. For the purposes of this research the Cronbach’s alpha coefficients only are reported in chapter 5.
The overall reliability (internal consistency) coefficients for the ALSDS are .92. Each subscale ranges from 0.60 to 0.83. Nunnaly and Bernstein (1994) use 0.70 as a directive, whilst Bartholomew, Antonia, and Marcia (2000) argue that between 0.60 and 0.80 is acceptable. The internal consistency reliabilities clearly fall within the range of directives.
The lower internal consistency coefficients for some of the ALSDS variables may be attributed to the life stage and inexperience of the participants regarding the attributes being measured. In view of the fact that the aim of this study was not to make individual predictions based on the ALSDS, but rather to investigate broad trends and certain relations between variables, the instrument was considered to be psychometrically acceptable for the purpose of the study.
4.2.2.6 Motivation for choice
The ALSDS was used in this research study because it is the only scale that has been developed specifically for assessing the self-directedness of open distance adult learners in the South African, multi-cultural context.
4.2.3 The Student Employability Attributes Scale (SEAS)
In this section the development, rationale, description of the scales, administration, interpretation, validity and reliability of the SEAS (Bezuidenhout & Coetzee, 2010) will be
discussed. The section will conclude with an explanation of the reason why this measurement instrument was used in the study.
4.2.3.1 The development of the SEAS
The Student Employability Attributes Scale of Bezuidenhout and Coetzee (2010), which was developed for the South African higher education context, is used to measure the respondents’ confidence in their self-perceived employability attributes.
4.2.3.2. Rationale behind the SEAS
The SEAS (Bezuidenhout & Coetzee, 2010) assesses the employability attributes that a graduate requires in order to ensure continued employability in the post-modern working milieu. The following eight employability attributes are measured: career self-management, cultural competence, career resilience, proactivity, entrepreneurial orientation, sociability, self-efficacy and emotional literacy. Career self-management refers to the individual capacity to ensure continued employability by developing an ongoing learning orientation and autonomously planning and managing a career (Bezuidenhout & Coetzee, 2010; Coetzee, 2012). Career resilience comprises the capability to welcome organisational changes as a result of an ability to easily adjust to and take pleasure in the introduction of new work processes, technologies and colleagues and to adjust work behaviours to these changes. An entrepreneurial orientation revolves around viewing risks as potential opportunities, a tolerance for ambiguity, a preference for innovation, creativity and autonomous action in the career progression (Bezuidenhout & Coetzee, 2010; Coetzee, 2012). Proactivity is the capacity of the individual to be an active agent in career planning and management (Bezuidenhout & Coetzee, 2010; Coetzee, 2012). Self-efficacy comprises the individual belief in one’s ability to deal with challenges, achieve personal goals and be successful in certain situations. Emotional literacy revolves around the awareness of and the capacity to change and manage personal emotions as well as the feelings of others (Bezuidenhout &
Coetzee, 2010; Coetzee, 2012). Sociability describes the proclivity to cultivate and nurture social networks and optimally utilise both formal and informal career and social networks for the purposes of career progression while cultural competence is the ability to operate effectively in various cultural situations (Bezuidenhout & Coetzee, 2010; Coetzee, 2012).
4.2.3.3 Description of the SEAS
The SEAS is a self-reporting, multi-factorial measuring instrument, comprising 56 items which are collated in the following eight sub-scales: career self-management (10 items) ‒ “I regularly reflect on what my career aspirations are”, cultural competence (5 items) ‒ “I know the customs of other cultures”, self-efficacy (5 items) ‒ “When I achieve something, it is
because of my own effort”, career resilience (6 items) ‒ “I regularly ask others’ opinions regarding my strengths and weaknesses”, sociability (7 items) ‒ “I actively seek feedback from others to make progress in my career”, entrepreneurial orientation (7 items) ‒ “I am responsible for my own successes and failures in my career”, proactivity (7 items) ‒ “I am able to easily establish and maintain interpersonal relationships” and emotional literacy (7 items) ‒ “It is easy for me to identify the emotions of others”. The questionnaire uses a six-point Likert-type scale to measure the respondents’ responses to each of the items.
4.2.3.4 Administration and interpretation of the SEAS
The SEAS (Bezuidenhout & Coetzee, 2010) may be administered both individually and in groups. The questionnaire may be completed in approximately 15 minutes. Detailed instructions are provided on the questionnaire and, thus, the questionnaire is self-explanatory and supervision is unnecessary.
Survey responses are scored electronically and the total scores are calculated by adding all the items for each subscale. The scores may range between 30 and 60. The higher the score, the higher the self-perceived ability of the respondent to demonstrate the employability attribute in question.
4.2.3.5 Validity and reliability of the SEAS
An Exploratory Factor Analysis (Bezuidenhout & Coetzee, 2010) confirmed the construct validity and inter-consistency reliability of the instrument. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficients obtained for each scale are as follows: career self-management (0.88), cultural competence (0.89), self-efficacy (0.83), career resilience (0.75), sociability (0.79), entrepreneurial orientation (0.80), proactivity (0.87), and emotional literacy (0.83), indicating high internal-consistency.
4.2.3.6 Motivation for the choice of the SEAS
The SEAS was chosen for the purposes of this research study because it is the only scale that focuses on measuring the employability attributes of South African learners involved in higher education.
4.3 ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS
According to the employment equity legislation in South Africa, equity should be established in the work environment by ensuring fair treatment, inter alia, by eradicating unfair practices and unfair discrimination. In order to address this issue with regard to psychological testing,
the following requirements are formalised in the Employment Equity Act 55 of 1998 (Coetzee et al., 2010):
The measuring instrument should be
• scientifically proven to be valid and reliable
• not biased against any employee or group
• fairly applied to all groups
4.4 PROCEDURE: DATA COLLECTION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE MEASURING INSTRUMENTS
The study adopted a cross-sectional, correlational survey, design approach. Cross-sectional correlational research designs are used to measure each individual unit of analysis on one or a group of variables identified at approximately the same time and then to analyse the association between the variables identified (Welman & Kruger, 2001). The respondents may perceive that a survey is more likely to be anonymous and may, therefore, be prepared to participate more readily in the study. The drawbacks to a survey approach to research include the possibility of a low response rate, difficulties with the language used in the survey and also possible misunderstanding of the questions. Possibly the biggest disadvantage is the fact that the respondents who decide to participate may not be representative of the original sample which was identified and surveyed. In addition, the obvious limitation to the number of questions and also the type of questions asked may also distort the data gathered from the survey (Leedy & Ormrod, 2005). For the purpose of this study, it was decided to use a postal survey as the data collection method.
Ethical clearance and permission to conduct the study were obtained from the management and research ethics committee of the ODL higher education institution that participated in the study. The questionnaires were mailed to the participants, using the postal services of the research institution. Each questionnaire included a covering letter to obtain the informed consent of the participants to use their responses for research purposes only. The covering letter explained the purpose of the research, procedure, potential benefits, confidentiality, anonymity, voluntary participation and withdrawal. No participant involved in the research process was harmed in any way. The participants were requested to complete the questionnaires and return them by mail to the researchers, using an enclosed return envelope.
4.5 SCORING OF THE MEASURING INSTRUMENTS
The responses to each of the instrument measures were initially captured onto a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet. The completed questionnaires were scored by an independent statistician. All the data were imported and analysed using statistical methods, specifically the statistical programmes SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Sciences) Version 20.0 for the Microsoft Windows platform (SPSS Inc., 2011), SAS version 9.2 (SAS, 2008) .
4.6 FORMULATION OF THE RESEARCH HYPHOTHESES
Research is used to test hypotheses and, thus, the research is directed by the research hypotheses (Leedy & Ormrod, 2005; Welman & Kruger, 2003). Research hypotheses provide probable, but unproven, clarifications of the phenomenon that is being examined.
Research data may either support a hypothesis or not support a hypothesis. A hypothesis that is not supported by the data is rejected by the researcher (Leedy & Ormrod, 2005).
A null hypothesis proclaims equality and, therefore, no relationship between two variables in a research study (Salkind, 2012). However, the null hypothesis provides a point of departure for the observation of the influence of an independent variable on a dependent variable. In this way, a yardstick is established for comparing significant differences between variables.
Significant differences between variables are usually not coincidental. A research hypothesis (or alternative hypothesis) is a declaration of a relationship between two variables and, therefore, it is a statement of inequality between two variables. An equivalent research hypothesis is formulated for each null hypothesis (Salkind, 2012). Table 4.7 presents an overview of the research hypotheses that were formulated for the purposes of this research study and also of the statistical procedures that were performed to test the research hypotheses.
TABLE 4.7: RESEARCH HYPOTHESES AND STATISTICAL PROCEDURES