METHODS: A total of 120 patients with MDD and 40 age- and sex-matched controls were recruited consecutively. Reliability was estimated using Cronbach's alpha, the split-half coefficient, and the test-retest coefficient; test-retest reliability was assessed using Spearman's correlation coefficient. A confirmatory factor analysis was used to determine the construct validity of the scale. The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) and the Morningness-Eveningness Questionnaire (MEQ) were used to check concurrent validity by evaluating the correlation between the C-BRIAN, PSQI, and MEQ.
RESULTS: The overall Cronbach's α value was 0.898, indicating good internal consistency. The Guttman split-half coefficient was 0.792, indicating good split-half reliability. Moreover, the test-retest reliability for both the total and individual item score was excellent. Confirmatory factor analysis revealed that construct validity was acceptable (χ2/df = 2.117, GFI = 0.80, AGFI = 0.87, CFI = 0.848, and RMSEA = 0.097). Furthermore, total BRIAN scores were found to be negatively correlated with MEQ (r = - 0.517, P
Objectives: This paper illustrates the development of a guideline to build a concept mapping based-learning strategy. Called the Rusnani concept mapping (RCM) protocol guideline, it was adapted from the Mohd Afifi learning model (MoAFF) and the analysis, design, development, implementation and evaluation (ADDIE) model, integrated with the Kemp model.
Methods: This model uses the five phases of analysis, design, development, implementation and evaluation. The validity of the guideline was determined by using content and face validity and the Delphi technique. Content validity for this RCM guideline was established using expert review. This formula suggested that if the content validity is greater than 70%, it shows good content validity, and if it is less than 70%, the content validity is low and it is advisable to recheck the content according to the objective of the study.
Results: The reliability of the RCM was 0.816, showing that the RCM guideline has high reliability and validity.
Conclusion: It is practical and acceptable for nurse educators to apply RCM as an effective and innovative teaching method to enhance the academic performance of their nursing students.
Methods: Manual sample size calculation using Microsoft Excel software and sample size tables were tabulated based on a single coefficient alpha and the comparison of two coefficients alpha.
Results: For a single coefficient alpha test, the approach by assuming the Cronbach's alpha coefficient equals to zero in the null hypothesis will yield a smaller sample size of less than 30 to achieve a minimum desired effect size of 0.7. However, setting the coefficient of Cronbach's alpha larger than zero in the null hypothesis could be necessary and this will yield larger sample size. For comparison of two coefficients of Cronbach's alpha, a larger sample size is needed when testing for smaller effect sizes.
Conclusions: In the assessment of the internal consistency of an instrument, the present study proposed the Cronbach's alpha's coefficient to be set at 0.5 in the null hypothesis and hence larger sample size is needed. For comparison of two coefficients' of Cronbach's alpha, justification is needed whether testing for extremely low and extremely large effect sizes are scientifically necessary.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This review is on some of the issues in standard setting based on the published articles of educational assessment researchers.
RESULTS: Standard or cut-off score should be to determine whether the examinee attained the requirement to be certified competent. There is no perfect method to determine cut score on a test and none is agreed upon as the best method. Setting standard is not an exact science. Legitimacy of the standard is supported when performance standard is linked to the requirement of practice. Test-curriculum alignment and content validity are important for most educational test validity arguments.
CONCLUSION: Representative percentage of must-know learning objectives in the curriculum may be the basis of test items and pass/fail marks. Practice analysis may help in identifying the must-know areas of curriculum. Cut score set by this procedure may give the credibility, validity, defensibility and comparability of the standard. Constructing the test items by subject experts and vetted by multi-disciplinary faculty members may ensure the reliability of the test as well as the standard.