CHAPTER IV CONSTRUCTION OF MORAL JUDGEMENT TEST, VALIDATION, DESCRIPTION AND ADMINISTRATION

Transcription

1 CHAPTER IV CONSTRUCTION OF MORAL JUDGEMENT TEST, VALIDATION, DESCRIPTION AND ADMINISTRATION 4.1 INTRODUCTION The present study is aimed at assessing the moral judgment among secondary school teachers of Karnataka. In this study, score on moral judgement is considered as dependent variable. Demogarphic variables like area, gender, school type, subjects taught, adjustment in various areas, job satisfaction and attitude were considered as Independent variables. The influences of these independent variables on dependent variable moral judgment have been the major focus of the study. As already mentioned in Chapter III, Moral Judgement Test constructed by investigator was used to collect necessary data regarding moral judgement of secondary school teachers. Bell s Adjustment Inventory-adult form developed by Bell M. Hughe M bell (1964) was used to collect necessary data regarding the status of adjustment in five areas viz., home adjustment, health adjustment, social adjustment, emotional adjustment and vocational adjustment. Job satisfaction of these teachers was measured through TJSS- Teachers Job satisfaction scale developed by Sudha and Sathyanarayana (1985 ) and attitude of selected sample was measured through MYTAS-Mysore Teachers attitude scale developed by Nayar (1975 ). 4.2 MORAL JUDGEMENT TEST FOR SECONDARY SCHOOL TEACHERS CONSTRUCTED BY THE INVESTIGATOR Preparation and Editing of Questions One of the main objectives of the study is to construct the Moral Judgment Test for secondary school teachers to find out the knowledge, beliefs and concept of 65

2 morality as comprehended by by a teacher which is closely related to his sub-cultural experience. After a careful review of literature related to moral judgement, the blue print for the moral judgement was prepared. The moral judgement has five areas as defined by Piaget namely, Moral Realism, Communicable Responsibility, The Efficacy of Super- Punishment, Retribution versus Restitution and Immanent Justice. The test with reference to these five areas of moral judgement was constructed by developing appropriate stories, related questions and their possible answers. The stories, related questions and their possible answers pertaining to the above mentioned five areas were finalised with the help of experts in the field. The first draft of Moral Judgement Test consisted of a total of 32 stories, out of which 6 stories related to moral realism, 6 stories related to communicable responsibility, 6 stories related to the efficacy of superpunishment, 7 stories related to Retribution versus Restitution and 7 stories related to Immanent Justice. These stories, related questions and possible answers were discussed with experts by investigator for establishing the content validity. On the basis of their suggestions the stories, related questions and possible answers were modified and some of the stories were eliminated. After this exercise, 12 stories were eliminated and 20 were remained in the test. Thus there were 4 stories related to moral realism, 4 stories related to communicable responsibilities, 4 stories related to the efficacy of superpunishment, 4 stories related to Retribution versus Restitution and 4 stories related to Immanent Justice. In the present study, the moral judgement test constructed by the investigator provides the score of moral judgement in terms of five areas viz., moral realism, communicable responsibilities, efficacy of superpunishment, Retribution versus 66

3 Restitution and Immanent justice. The description of each of the five areas are as follows. (i) Moral realism: This aspect of moral judgement refers to the belief that acts should be judged in terms of effects and consequences, but not to be judged on the basis of the motive behind the act. (ii) Communicable responsibility: This aspect of moral judgement refers to the choice of collective or of individual responsibility of punishable act. (iii) The efficacy of superpunishment: This aspect of moral judgement refers to the acceptance or rejection of the idea that the severe punishment is more efficacious. (iv) Retribution versus Restitution: This aspect of moral judgement refers to the belief that the punishment should be retributive versus the belief that the punishment should be restitutive. (v) Immanent justice: This aspect of moral judgement refers to the belief in the existence of automatic punishment which emanates from things themselves : Scrutiny of the stories by the experts The 32 stories prepared by the investigator comprising of moral and ethical issues were given to the Experts for their comments and suggestions. This was done by five experts in the field of value education. After their scruitiny they offered certain suggestions and with the process of elimination of difficult stories and very easy stories, the investigator was able to get 25 stories for moral judgement on all five dimensions as mentioned in the operational definitions. 67

4 4.2.3 Try out The modified and reconstructed moral judgement test consisiting of 25 stories related to five areas was tried out on a sample of 100 teachers, out of which 50 teachers working in government and 50 teachers working in private schools with equal number of male and female teachers teaching arts and science subjects in and around the city of Mysore. This was done to know the opinion of teachers on the various stories, the related questions and possible answers of moral judgement test. The try out of test has compelled the investigator to eliminate further very easy and too difficult stories to comphrehend ceratin items by the teachers. After the try out, 6 stories were further dropped out and thus the final moral judgment test consisted of 19 stories. This was further pilot tested on 30 teachers from the following five schools in the city of Sakleshpur. They are Government High School; Rotary English School; St. Joseph s Girl s High School; Chethana High School and Vasavi High School. The pilot test confirmed that 19 stories have been well understood and answered by the teachers. Thus, in the final moral judgement test, there are 4 stories related to Moral Realism, 4 stories related to Communicable Responsibility, 3 stories related to the Efficacy of Superpunishment, 4 stories related to Retribution versus Restitution and 4 stories related to Immanent Justice so that all 19 stories consisted the related questions with possible answers. 68

5 The details of moral judgement test are given below in the table 4.1. Table 4.1 Details of Moral Judgement Test Sl. Area of Moral Judgement Test of stories Specific story numbers 1 Moral realism 4 1, 2, 3, 4 2 Communicable responsibility 4 5, 6, 7, 8 3 The efficacy of super punishment (severe punishment) 3 9, 10, 11 4 Retribution versus Restitution 4 12, 13, 14, 15 5 Immanent Justice 4 16, 17, 18, Reliability of Moral Judgement Test A tool is reliable if it is consistent in measuring what it is designed to measure. Reliability refers to the consistency or stability of a test. Generally, reliability of a measuring instrument is expressed in the form of coefficient which indicates the extent to which errors of measurement are affecting the scores of the test. In the present study, reliability coefficient is determined by test-retest method. In test-retest method, the same test will be administered to same group twice in the interval of 2 to 3 weeks. The scores obtained in both test and retest will be correlated. The coefficient of correlation gives the index of reliability. In the present study, the moral judgement test was administered to a total of 100 teachers twice in an interval of 15 days. The scores obtained in the tests (test and re-test) was correlated and the correlation coefficient was determined which is an index for reliability. 69

6 The coefficient of correlation was determined using Karl Pearson s formula, N dx.dy dx dy r = [ N dx 2 ( dx) 2 ] [ N dy 2 ( dy) 2 ] The reliability coefficient thus obtained is 0.758, indicating that the moral judgement test is highly reliable Validity of Moral Judgement Test A measuring instrument is said to be valid, if it measures what it purports to measure. Validity (truthfulness) may be defined as the extent of degree to which it should be established is the major consideration while establishing the validity. Content validity of the moral judgment test: In the present study, stories, related questions and possible answers of moral judgement test was shown, discussed and clarified with experts by the investigator to establish content validity. The experts after going through all the stories declared that all the stories satisfy the content aspect related to moral judgment. Thus, as per experts, moral judgement test prepared by the investigator satisfies content validity. On the basis of suggestions, some stories, related questions and possible answers were modified, reconstructed and some stories were eliminated. Thus after obtaining the expert opinion and after try out, the test was finalised. The validity of present moral judgement test ranges from to as indicated by areas to total correlation. Table 4.2 Validity inter areas to total correlation Moral Judgement Test Sl. Areas of Moral Judgement Test Correlation 1 Moral realism Communicable responsibility The efficacy of super punishment (severe punishment) Retribution versus Restitution Immanent Justice

7 Face vaidity: A test is said to have face validity when it appears to measure what ever the investigator has in mind, viz., what the investigator thought of was measuring (Garett, 1966). When the investigator showed moral judgement test prepared by him to those who did not have any knowledge of test construction method, they readily perceived the purpose of the items. Thus, it may be said that ites/stories framed in the moral judgment test satisfied the face validity requirements. Thus, in the present investigation, the test on moral judgment test satisfies both face and content validty Scoring Procedure for Moral Judgement Test Scoring for the Moral Realism Moral realism refers to the belief that the acts should be judged in terms of consequence not on the motive behind the act. Stories 1, 2, 3 and 4 are related to Moral Realism. Scoring for the stories 1, 2, 3 and 4 is shown in table. In each case, those responses judged in terms of intent Moral Realism were taken as matured, while those judged in terms of consequences were taken as immature. 71

8 Table 4.3 Scoring for stories 1, 2, 3 and 4 Story Question Correct answer Scoring 1 Agree Agree=1; Disagree=0 1 2 Agree Agree=1; Disagree=0 3 Agree Agree=1; Disagree=0 1 Agree Agree=1; Disagree=0 2 2 Disagree Agree=0; Disagree=1 3 Agree Agree=1; Disagree=0 4 Disagree Agree=0; Disagree=1 3 1 Disagree Agree=0; Disagree=1 2 Disagree Agree=0; Disagree=1 4 1 Disagree Agree=0; Disagree= Scoring for Communicable Responsibility Communicable Responsibility refers to the choice of collective responsibility or of individual responsibility for punishable act. The stories 5, 6, 7 and 8 are related to this area. In each case, those responses rejected the communicable responsibility were taken as matured, while those accepted the communicable responsibility were taken as immatured. Scoring for stories 5, 6, 7 and 8 is shown in table

9 Table 4.4 Scoring for stories 5, 6, 7 and 8 Story Question Correct answer Scoring Yes Yes=1; No=0 2 No Yes=0, No=1 1 1 Yes Yes=1; No=0 2 No Yes=0; No=1 3 Yes Yes=1; No=0 4 Yes Yes=1; No=0 5 No Yes=0; No= Attitudinal statement (SA to SD) Attitudinal statement (SA to SD) Fully agree=5, Agree=4, Cannot say=3, Disagree=2, Fully disagree=1 Fully agree=1, Agree=2, Cannot say=3, Disagree=4, Fully disagree=5 8 1 Agree Agree Agree=1, Disagree=0 Agree=1, Disagree= Scoring for the Efficacy of Severe (Super) Punishment The efficacy of severe punishment refers to the acceptance or rejection of the idea that severe punishment is more effective in developing morality. The stories 9, 10 and 11 are related to this area. The responses indicating that less severe punishment was more effective, scored as matured responses whereas the responses indicating that more severe punishment was more effective, scored as immatured responses. Scoring for stories 9, 10 and 11 is shown in table

10 Table 4.5 Scoring for stories 9, 10 and 11 Story Question Correct answer Scoring 1 Second Boy The first boy=0; The second boy=1 9 2 Wrong Right=0; Wrong=1 3 Right Right=1; Wrong= Yes Yes=1; No=0 2 Yes Yes=1; No=0 3 Yes Yes=1; No=0 1 Agree Agree=1; Disagree=0 2 Disagree Agree=0; Disagree= Scoring for Retribution versus Restitution Retributive means a repayment or a suitable return given by reward or punishment. Restitution refers to the act of restoring what was lost. The stories 12, 13, 14 and 15 are related to Retribution versus Restitution. The responses which are restitutive are matured responses while the responses which are retributive are immatured responses. Scoring for stories 12, 13, 14 and 15 are shown in table

11 Table 4.6 Scoring for stories 12, 13, 14 and 15 Story Question Correct answer Scoring 1 Agree Agree=1, Disagree=0 2 Disagree Agree=0; Disagree= Disagree Agree=0; Disagree=1 A Agree Agree=1, Disagree=0 B Agree Agree=1, Disagree=0 C Agree Agree=1, Disagree=0 1 Third First=0, Second=0, Third=1 2 Second First=0, Second=1, Third=0 1 Attitudinal statement (SA to SD) Fully agree=1, Agree=2, Cannot say=3, Disagree=4, Fully disagree=5 Attitudinal statement Fully agree=5, Agree=4, Cannot say=3, 2 Disagree=2, Fully disagree=1 (SA to SD) 1 Disagree Agree=0; Disagree=1 2 Disagree Agree=0; Disagree=1 3 Agree Agree=1; Disagree= Scoring for Immanent Justice Immanent Justice is the belief in the existence of automatic punishment which immanent from things themselves. Stories 16, 17, 18 and 19 are related to immanent justice. Those responses which denote immanent justice that is related to idea of chance are treated as matured responses. Those responses which are attributed some sort of supernatural causes of these events are treated as immatured responses. Scoring for stories 16, 17, 18 and 19 are shown in table

12 Story Question 16 1 Table 4.7 Scoring for stories 16, 17, 18 and 19 Correct answer Attitudinal statement (SA to SD) Attitudinal statement (SA to SD) Scoring Fully agreed=5, Agreed=4, Cannot say=3, Disagree=2, Fully disagree=1 Fully agreed=1, Agreed=2, Cannot say=3, Disagree=4, Fully disagree= First First=1, Second =0, Third= First First=1, Second =0, Third=0, 19 A Yes Yes=1; No=0 B No Yes=0; No=1 C No Yes=0; No=1 D Yes Yes=1; No= : Final version of moral moral judgement test The final version of the moral judgment test consists of 19 stories. Both englsih and Kannada versions of the Moral judgment test are given appendix. 76