A comparison of the effectiveness of three commonly used scoring methods for prioritizing areas of need
- UNCG Author/Contributor (non-UNCG co-authors, if there are any, appear on document)
- Mary Q. Penta (Creator)
- Institution
- The University of North Carolina at Greensboro (UNCG )
- Web Site: http://library.uncg.edu/
- Advisor
- Rita O'Sullivan
Abstract: The purpose of this study was to investigate the comparability in an educational setting of the mean difference, Del-N, and weighted needs index methods of scoring dual-response needs assessments. Accuracy in the assessment of need is essential to the effectiveness of the needs assessment process, and the choice of scoring method affects the accuracy of that assessment. The three methods included in this study were found to be comparable in a previous study using a single sample of 84 respondents in a business training setting. This study used data from a total of 339 respondents from 19 public elementary, middle, and high schools in central North Carolina. Dual-response needs assessment instruments based on standards of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics or the National Science Teachers Association were administered at sampled schools. Needs assessment scores were used to calculate mean difference, Del-N, and weighted needs indices for each school. Spearman rank order correlation coefficients were calculated to assess the comparability of the indices generated with each of the methods.
A comparison of the effectiveness of three commonly used scoring methods for prioritizing areas of need
PDF (Portable Document Format)
6090 KB
Created on 1/1/1994
Views: 166
Additional Information
- Publication
- Dissertation
- Language: English
- Date: 1994
- Subjects
- Needs assessment
- Public schools $z North Carolina $x Evaluation