Phase 3: What have I learned?
This semester is almost towards the end. I have recalled what I have learnd from this class. I went back to check our first class' discussion questions as below:
1) What am I learning objectives for this class? I guess our group final project, team work with learning process. Building on the positive youth development research being carried out by Dr. Lerner and colleagues at Tuft University’s Institute for Applied Research in Youth Development (e.g., Bowers, et. al., 2010; Lerner, et. al., 2005;2010), we have been carried out an observational study that examines the relationship among dimensions of positive youth development, weight, healthy eating habits, career aspirations and community resources. Online Surveys were used to collect data for this study. The 5-C measure of positive youth development (Lerner, et. al., 2005) will be used to measure positive youth development. Our group focous on self-worth of the study. The class developed measures for youth’s demographics, health status/healthy eating habits, career aspirations and community resources. I think this course examines a number of approaches to data collection in social work research such as surveys, scales, and observational techniques. We have been working on
2) What is measurement?
3) What role does measurement play in the research process? According to Barker et al., (2002), Measurement (Chapters 4 to 7). Having formulated the research questions, the next step is to decide how to measure the psychological constructs of interest. Using the term ‘‘measurement’’ in its broadest sense, to encompass qualitative as well as quantitative approaches to data collection. Quantitative measurement; Psychometric theory: (reliability; validity; generalizability theory; Item response theory; standards for reliability and validity); Qualitative methods: Self-report methods (open-ended and closed-ended questions; quantitative self-report methods); Observation (qualitative observation; reliability and validity issues).
4)What are the distinctions between these two interpretations of the measurement process (see Boumans, 2005)?
- Ellis - Associative interpretation
- Correlation interpretation - Heidelberger (1994a, 1994b)
I have learnd how to development and evaluation of the psychometric properties of quantitative social science measurement tools. Theories of measurement (True Score Theory and Item Response Theory), scale development, item and scale analysis using advanced statistical procedures (e.g., factor analysis and structural equation modeling) will be addressed. a) I have learned how measurement error impact on the quality of a research study. b) how to match measurement strategies to their research design in order to reduce measurement error. Based on the two strategic above, Dr. Farmer has described the use of various approaches to measurement, including standardized scales; behavioral counts and ratings; and individualized rating scales. c) classical test theroy within the context of social work research, which the major assupmtions, strengths, and weakness of classical measurement theory. I posted lots of information about Item Response Theory (IRT) in the previous sections here. Furthermore, we will be more understandable for reliably and validity within the context of classical measurement theroy and IRT. According to develop and validate a measure, I guess my group did not engaging in the process of developing and validating a measure. The last step is to learn how to evaluate the dimensionality of a measure. For the past few weeks, Dr. farmer spent much time on describing EFA/CFA, which I also posted some information here.
