GROUP ASSIGNMENT (2) Arunah N Saranya New

ARUNAH SHIVJI M20171000598
SARANYA KALIAPPAN M20171000148
UNIVERSITI PENDIDIKAN SULTAN

IDRIS
Sem 3
Session 2017/2018
ASSIGNMENT
SRU 6024
Designing Questionnaire
ARUNAH SHIVJI
M20171000598
SARANYA KALIAPPAN
M20171000148
LECTURER : DR. HAFSAH BINTI TAHA

CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 1
INTRODUCTION 2
OBJECTIVE AND RESEARCH QUESTION 3
VALIDATION AND REABLITY OF QUESTIONNAIRE 4-21
CONCLUSIOM 22
BIBLIOGRAFI 23-24
ATTACHMENT 25
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First of all we want to thank Almighty for giving me a chance to accomplish

this assignment. This assignment gives us a lot of information about how to design
questionnaire. Other than that we also learned how to do validation and reability using
SPSS. Secondly we want to give our appreciation to Dr.Hafsah Binti Taha for her
kindness gives us guidance and help to make this assignment. Without Dr. Hafsah
Binti Taha we cannot successfully finish this assignment.
We also want to give our appreciation to both of parents for giving us morale
support to finish this assignment. For our friends thank you so much for the help and
support. Lastly, thanks a lot to the people who give me a lot of inspiration and morale
support for encourage me to finish this assignment An Annotated Bibliography.
1
INTRODUCTION
As a measure of a research instrument or tool, validity is the degree to which it
actually measures what it is supposed to measure (Wan, 2002). In simple terms,
validity refers to how well an instrument as measures what it is intended to measure.
A validated questionnaire refers to a questionnaire or scale that has been developed to
be administered among the intended respondents. The validation processes should
have been completed using a representative sample, demonstrating adequate
reliability and validity. A standard questionnaire of internal consistency is Cronbach’s
Alpha (CA). Cronbach Alpha values range from 0 – 1.0. In most cases the value should be
at least 0.70 or higher although a value from 0.60 to 0.70 is acceptable. If item have a
low value, we have to delete a question. If doing so dramatically improves our
Cronbach’s Alpha.
Reliability is the degree to which an assessment tool produces stable and

consistent results. Types of Reliability. Test-retest reliability is a measure of
reliability obtained by administering the same test twice over a period of time to a
group of individuals. Generally, a questionnaire with an α of 0.8 is considered reliable
(Field, 2009). Since the amount of items in a questionnaire is taken into account in the
equation, a hugh amount of variables can upgrade the α (Cortina, 1993; Field, 2009).
For example, if we do a reliability analysis for just the items making up the first factor
in our research, we get the same α, but the average correlation is 0.49 instead of 0.43.
How hugh the alpha should be for a dataset with a particular amount of items is still a
point of discussion (Cortina, 1993). Cortina (1993) recommends to determine the
adequacy of a measure on the level of precision needed. Cortina (1993) recommends
to determine the adequacy of a measure on the level of precision needed. If we want
to make a fine distinction in the level of pleasure in writing someone has, a more
reliable measure is needed than if we want to make a rough distinction. However,
since the α of this questionnaire is far higher than 0.8, we can assume that it is reliable
(Field, 2009).
Validity and reliability are important concepts in measuring instruments. A

measurement cannot be valid unless it is reliable; it must be both valid and reliable if
it is to be depended upon as an accurate representation of a concept or attribute (Wan,
2002).
2
OBJECTIVE
In this questionnaire design, validity and reliability is referring to the confidence that
the score earned is a good representation of a teacher’s actual knowledge of the
content,attitude towards the contents and practices that are taken for Green
Chemistry.“Reliability is of more concern on standardized or high stakes testing than
they are in classroom assessment. In a classroom, students' knowledge is repeatedly
assessed and this allows the teacher to adjust as new insights are acquired” (Moskal
& Leydens, 2000, p. 7).
i) To evaluate understanding level about Green Chemistry among the teachers.
ii) To identify teachers attitude towards Green Chemistry.
iii) To see how far the teachers apply green chemistry awareness in daily life .
Research question
The research presented in this dissertation proposes to answer the following research
questions:
1. What are the likely pathways for the green chemistry?
2. How do teachers reason about benefits, costs and risks in real world context that is
relevant to chemistry?
3. What does examination of eye gaze patterns reveal about chemistry teachers’
understanding of structure-property?
4. In what ways do the understanding, interpretation, and assimilation of information

teachers at different levels in their chemistry education?
3
VALIDATION
 Agree
X Disagree
ITEM EXPERT 1 EXPERT 2 AGREE DISAGREE
1 X X /
2   /
3 X X /
4 X X /
5 X X /
6   /
7   /
8 X X /
9   /
10   /
11 X  /
12   /
13   /
14   /
15   /
16   /
17   /
18   /
4
19 X  /
20   /
21   /
22   /
23   /
24   /
25  X /
26   /
27   /
28 X X /
29   /
30   /
31 X X /
32 X X /
33   /
34 X  /
35 X  /
36   /
37   /
38   /
39 X X /
40   /
5
This questionnaire consists of 40 questions. 40 questions were created

based on three main construct which are ‘Green Chemistry awareness/Knowledge,
Green Chemistry practices and Green Chemistry attitude’. This questionnaire used a
5-point Likert-style scale (Strongy agree, Agree, Neutral, Disagree, Strongly
Dissagree). After designing questionnaire we have sent questionnaire to two experts
in field of chemistry for enhancement of content of questionnaire. We provided with
measurement tool and are asked to provide feedback. Their feedback is then analysed
based on Cohen's kappa. Cohen's kappa measures agreement between two raters only.
The first was Landis and Koch, who characterized values < 0 as indicating no
agreement and 0–0.20 as slight, 0.21–0.40 as fair, 0.41–0.60 as moderate, 0.61–0.80
as substantial, and 0.81–1 as almost perfect agreement. Fleiss's equally arbitrary
guidelines characterize kappas over 0.75 as excellent, 0.40 to 0.75 as fair to good, and
below 0.40 as poor.
In this questionnaire the agreement proportion is 35/40 or 0.875. While the

disagreement proportion is 5/40 or 0.125. Overall agreement proportion according to
Cohen’s kappa is:
NUMBER OF AGREE – NUMBER OF DISAGREE
TOTAL NUMBER OF ITEM
NUMBER OF AGREE = 35
NUMBER OF DISAGREE = 5
TOTAL NUMBER OF ITEM = 40
35 - 5 = 30 = 0.75
40 40
The Cohen’s kappa reading shows 0.75 for this questionnaire. So, its
shows good/perfect levels of agreement based on Cohen’s kappa. This indicates the
amount of agreement between the two experts is strong. The questions in this
questionnaire is acceptable. In conclusion this questionnaire have high validation.
6
CONSTRUCT 1 : GREEN CHEMISTRY KNOWLEDGE
1 X X /
2   /
3 X X /
4 X X /
5 X X /
6   /
7   /
8 X X /
9   /
10   /
11 X  /
12   /
13   /
Construct 1 that is Green Chemistry Knowledge consists of 13 questions.

The agreement proportion is 12/13 or 0.923. In other hand the disagreement
proportion from is 1/13 or 0.077. Overall agreement proportion for construct 1
according to Cohen’s kappa is:
12 - 1 = 11 = 0. 846
13 13
7
The Cohen’s kappa reading shows 0.846 for construct 1. So, its shows
good/ perfect levels of agreement based on Cohen’s kappa. This indicates the amount
of agreement between the two experts is strong. The questions in this construct is
acceptable. In conclusion this construct 1 in this questionnaire is highly validated.
CONSTRUCT 2 : GREEN CHEMISTRY ATTITUDE
1   /
2   /
3   /
4   /
5   /
6 X  /
7   /
8   /
9   /
10   /
11   /
12  X /
13   /
14   /
8
Construct 2 that is Green Chemistry Attitude consists of 14 questions. The

agreement proportion is 12/14 or 0.857. While the disagreement proportion is 2/14 or
0.143. Total agreement proportion for construct 2 based on Cohen’s kappa is:
12 - 2 = 10 = 0.714
14 14
The Cohen’s kappa reading shows 0.714 for construct 2. So, its shows
good/ perfect levels of agreement based on Cohen’s kappa. The questions in this
construct 2 is acceptable. This indicates the amount of agreement between the two
experts is strong. In conclusion questions in construct 2 that is Green Chemistry
Attitude have high validation.
9
CONSTRUCT 3 : GREEN CHEMISTRY PRACTICES
1 X X /
2   /
3   /
4 X X /
5 X X /
6   /
7 X  /
8 X  /
9   /
10   /
11   /
12 X X /
13   /
Construct 3 that is Green Chemistry Practices consists of 13 questions.

The agreement proportion is 11/13 or 0.846. While the disagreement proportion is
2/13 or 0.154. Total agreement proportion for construct 3 according to Cohen’s kappa
is:
11 - 2 = 9 = 0.69
13 13
10
The Cohen’s kappa reading shows 0.692 for construct 3. So its shows
good/ perfect levels of agreement based on Cohen’s kappa. The questions in this
construct 3 is acceptable. This indicates the amount of agreement between the two
experts is strong. In conclusion questions in construct 3 that is Green Chemistry
Practices have high validation.
11
RELIABILITY ANALYSIS.
A reliability coefficient is a measure of how well a test measures achievement. It is

the proportion of variance in observed scores. The term “reliability coefficient”
actually refers to several different coefficients:
 Cronbach’s alpha
 A simple correlation
 Pearson’s correlation
 The Spearman Brown formula
 Cohen’s Kappa
The range of the reliability coefficient is from 0 to 1. Rule of thumb for preferred
levels of the coefficient:
 For high tests, > 0.85. Some authors suggest this figure should be above .90.
 For low tests, > 0.70. Some authors suggest this figure should be above 0.80
Therefore, Cronbach’s alpha is most commonly used to assess the internal consistency
of a questionnaire that is made up of multiple Likert-type scales and items.All items
are responded to on a Likert scale of 1-5, where 5 = Strongly agree and 1 = Strongly
disagree. This is so throughout the scale a high score on a question indicates a high
belief in value.To establish whether the items on this questionnaire all reliably
measure the same construct, we ask 30 participants to complete this questionnaire, so
we can calculate Cronbach's alpha based on their scores. Alpha is commonly reported
for the development of scales intended to measure attitudes , tests of teacher’s
knowledge and understanding that cite Cronbach’s alpha as an indicator of
instrument quality.
Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
.932 40
Item-Total Statistics
12
Corrected
Scale Mean if Item Scale Variance if Item-Total Cronbach's Alpha if
Deleted Item Deleted Correlation Item Deleted
B3GC1 157.9667 276.930 .815 .928
B3GC2 157.4667 296.051 .183 .933
B3GC3 157.8333 279.247 .798 .928
B3GC4 157.5333 283.292 .584 .930
B3GC5 158.4000 276.938 .602 .930
B3GC6 158.0000 289.310 .464 .931
B3GC7 157.5667 297.426 .100 .934
B3GC8 157.9667 276.930 .815 .928
B3GC9 157.9333 275.995 .545 .931
B3GC10 157.9667 276.930 .815 .928
B3GC11 157.3333 297.195 .159 .933
B3GC12 157.8333 279.247 .798 .928
B3GC13 157.5333 283.292 .584 .930
B1GCK1 157.7667 293.702 .212 .933
B1GCK2 158.1667 292.489 .294 .932
B1GCK3 158.1000 286.507 .557 .930
B1GCK4 157.5333 291.085 .367 .932
B1GCK5 157.7333 284.823 .527 .930
B1GCK6 157.9000 286.852 .383 .932
B1GCK7 157.7333 283.651 .493 .931
B1GCK8 157.9333 283.582 .579 .930
B1GCK9 157.6667 284.299 .395 .932
B1GCK10 157.6667 287.816 .321 .933
13
B1GCK11 157.8000 281.407 .618 .929
B1GCK12 157.9667 273.413 .825 .927
B1GCK13 157.6333 294.447 .178 .933
B2GC1 157.8333 279.247 .798 .928
B2GC2 157.5333 283.292 .584 .930
B2GC3 157.5000 295.431 .153 .934
B2GC4 157.5000 285.845 .484 .931
B2GC5 158.0000 289.310 .464 .931
B2GC6 157.6333 298.447 .061 .934
B2GC7 158.0000 275.655 .808 .927
B2GC8 157.3667 293.275 .240 .933
B2GC9 157.8667 277.982 .781 .928
B2GC10 157.6000 280.731 .602 .930
B2GC11 157.5667 295.151 .182 .933
B2GC12 157.5667 280.530 .660 .929
B2GC13 158.0000 289.310 .464 .931
B2GC14 157.3000 299.183 .037 .934
Scale Statistics
Mean Variance Std. Deviation N of Items
161.8000 300.234 17.32728 40
Overall Reliability Analysis :
14
Green chemistry which is the latest and one of the most researched topics now days
has been in demand since 1990's. Green chemistry as the name indicates is a
technology imbedded, environmental friendly and cost effective utilization of
resources that minimize or even eliminate the production of harmful bi-products in
the design and manufacturing of the produce. (PDF) A Focus & Review on the
Advancement of Green Chemistry. [accessed Nov 02 2018]. Therefore , we had The
result shows that Cronbach’s alpha quite high : 0.932 , which shows the questionnaire
is reliable. Many researchers consider an alpha coefficient at least 0.070 or more to
be adequate for the scale (Nunnally, 1978). so, we conclude that the teacher’s
knowledge , atitude and practices towards Green Chemistry are at satisfactory level.
CONSTRUCT 1 : GREEN CHEMISTRY KNOWLEDGE
15
Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
.838 13
Corrected Cronbach's
Scale Mean if Scale Variance Item-Total Alpha if Item
Item Deleted if Item Deleted Correlation Deleted
B1GCK1 47.7667 38.530 .476 .827
B1GCK2 48.1667 40.282 .347 .835
B1GCK3 48.1000 38.438 .577 .822
B1GCK4 47.5333 40.809 .302 .837
B1GCK5 47.7333 37.306 .590 .819
B1GCK6 47.9000 37.059 .512 .824
B1GCK7 47.7333 39.926 .263 .843
B1GCK8 47.9333 38.064 .517 .824
B1GCK9 47.6667 36.230 .489 .827
B1GCK10 47.6667 37.264 .441 .831
B1GCK11 47.8000 35.959 .693 .811
B1GCK12 47.9667 34.792 .738 .806
B1GCK13 47.6333 38.861 .423 .830
Scale Statistics
16
51.8000 43.959 6.63013 13
Reliability Analysis for Construct 1
Cronbach’s alpha for construct 1 is : 0.838 , which shows the questionnaire is reliable.
Cronbach’s alpha has been described as ‘one of the most important and pervasive
statistics in research involving test construction and use’ (Cortina, 1993, p. 98) to the
extent that its use in research with multiple-item measurements is
considered routine (Schmitt, 1996, p. 350).Reliability coefficients range from 0.00 to
1.00. Ideally, score reliability should be above 0.70. Coefficients in the range
0.80-0.90 are very good for classroom assessments.
CONSTRUCT 2 : GREEN CHEMISTRY ATTITUDE
17
Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
.822 14
B2GC1 53.9667 28.447 .811 .785
B2GC2 53.6667 29.747 .578 .802
B2GC3 53.6333 34.930 .010 .842
B2GC4 53.6333 29.482 .602 .800
B2GC5 54.1333 31.982 .430 .813
B2GC6 53.7667 34.530 .092 .832
B2GC7 54.1333 27.913 .742 .787
B2GC8 53.5000 32.810 .253 .825
B2GC9 54.0000 27.862 .813 .782
B2GC10 53.7333 28.547 .632 .796
B2GC11 53.7000 34.148 .114 .833
B2GC12 53.7000 28.907 .651 .795
B2GC13 54.1333 31.982 .430 .813
B2GC14 53.4333 34.944 .056 .832
18
Scale Statistics
57.9333 35.651 5.97081 14
Theoretically, Cronbach’s alpha results will give a number from 0 to 1,sometimes will
get negative numbers as well. A negative number indicates that something is wrong
with the data. The general rule of thumb is that a Cronbach’s alpha of .70 and above
is good, .80 and above is better, and .90 and above is best.
19
CONSTRUCT 3 : GREEN CHEMISTRY PRACTICES
Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
.875 13
B3GC1 48.2333 37.564 .804 .852
B3GC2 47.7333 44.202 .237 .879
B3GC3 48.1000 38.714 .754 .856
B3GC4 47.8000 39.338 .622 .862
B3GC5 48.6667 36.506 .658 .860
B3GC6 48.2667 42.271 .436 .872
B3GC7 47.8333 45.385 .069 .887
B3GC8 48.2333 37.564 .804 .852
B3GC9 48.2000 37.683 .470 .878
B3GC10 48.2333 37.564 .804 .852
B3GC11 47.6000 45.352 .127 .882
B3GC12 48.1000 38.714 .754 .856
B3GC13 47.8000 39.338 .622 .862
20
Scale Statistics
52.0667 46.478 6.81749 13
Cronbach’s alpha does come with some limitations: scores that have a low number of
items associated with them tend to have lower reliability, and sample size can also
influence the results for better or worse. Cronbach's alpha will generally increase as
the intercorrelations among test items increase, and is thus known as an internal
consistency estimate of reliability of test scores.
21
CONCLUSION
Based on the validity and the reliability analysis regarding research findings, so it can
be concluded that the knowledge, attitude and practices of Green Chemistry learning
was supported by proper learning materials developed in the initial stage of this study.
Reliability refers to accuracy and precision of a measurement instrument or scale.
Reliability of test scores are estimated through measures of internal consistency has
been characterized mathematically in many ways that appear, on the surface at least,
to be very different to one another. The coefficient alpha is the most widely used
measure of internal consistency for composite scores. Precision of measurement is
one of the major issues, which is frequently quantified by the reliability coefficients.
The coefficient alpha, developed by Cronbach (1951), is the most commonly used
index for estimating the reliability of measurement instruments such as scales,
multiple item tests, questionnaires, or inventories (Raykov 1997) in all the fields of
research such as psychology, education, statistics, sociology, medicine, counseling,
nursing, political science, and economics (Cortina 1993).
22
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Baxter, G.P, Shavelson, R.J, Golman, S.R. & Pine, J. (1992). Educational of
procedure-based scoring for hands-on science assessment. Journal of
Educational Measurement, 29(1), hlm.1 – 17.
2. Boomsma, A.. (2000). Reporting analyses of covariance structures. Structural

Equation Modeling, 7(3), hlm-461-4834
3. Camilli, G. & Shepard, L. (1994). Method for Identifying Biased Test Items
(Vol.4). London Sage: Publications
4. Cardinet, J., Tourneur, A. (1976). The symmetry of generalizability theory:
Application to educational measurement. Journal of Educational
Measurement, 13(2), hlm.119-35.
5. Abedi, J & Lord, C. (2001). The language factor in mathematics test. Applied
Measurement in Education 14(3), 219 –234.
6. Aiken, L. (1979). Attitude toward mathematics and science in Iranian middle
schools. School Science and Mathematics, 79, hlm.229-234.
7. Abedi, J. (2002). Measuring instructional quality in accountability systems:
Classroom assignment and student achievement. Educational Assessment,
8(3), hlm.231-257.
8. Azizi Ahmad dan Mohd Isha Awang. (2008). Pengukuran dan penilaian
pendidikan. Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.
9. Angoff, W. dan Ford, S. (1973). Questionnaire of scholastic aptitude. Journal

of Educational Measurmant, 10(2), 95 – 105.
10.Validation Questionnaire : Retrieved on 20/10/2018:

https://www.methodspace.com/validating-a-questionnaire/
11. Landis, J.R.; Koch, G.G. (1977). "The measurement of observer agreement
for categorical data". Biometrics. 33 (1):
12.Gwet, K. (2010). "Handbook of Inter-Rater Reliability (Second

Edition)" ISBN 978-0-9708062-2-2
23
13. Fleiss, J.L. (1981). Statistical methods for rates and proportions (2nd ed.).
New York: John Wiley. ISBN 0-471-26370-2.
14. Cohen, J. (1968). "Weighed kappa: Nominal scale agreement with provision
for scaled disagreement or partial credit". Psychological Bulletin. 70 (4):
213–220.
15. Umesh, U. N.; Peterson, R.A.; Sauber M. H. (1989). "Interjudge agreement

and the maximum value of kappa". Educational and Psychological
Measurement. 49: 835–850.
16. Viera, Anthony J.; Garrett, Joanne M. (2005). "Understanding interobserver

agreement: the kappa statistic". Family Medicine. 37 (5): 360–363.
17. Strijbos, J.; Martens, R.; Prins, F.; Jochems, W. (2006). "Content analysis:
What are they talking about?". Computers & Education. 46: 29–48.
18. Uebersax, JS. (1987). "Diversity of decision-making models and the

measurement of interrater agreement" (PDF). Psychological Bulletin. 101:
140–146.
24
ATTACHMENT
25
EXPERT
1
26
Kepada 25 OKTOBER 2018
Guru Subjek kimia,
Tuan/Puan,
Pakar Rujuk Instrumen ‘Kesedaran Kimia Hijau Dalam Kalangan Guru-guru SJK
(Tamil) Simpang Lima, Klang’ Untuk Tujuan Pengesahan
Dengan segala hormatnya perkara di atas adalah dirujuk.
2. Saya Arunah Shivji (M20171000598) dan Saranya Kaliappan (M20171000148)

sedang menjalankan kerja khusus bagi subjek SRU 6024 Kaedah Penyelidikan
Kuantitatif yang bertajuk PENILAIAN INSTRUMEN KESEDARAN KIMIA
HIJAU GURU-GURU SJK(T) SIMPANG LIMA, KLANG. Saya memohon
kerjasama Tuan/Puan bagi menyemak dan membuat pengesahan instrumen yang
dilampirkan.
3. Sehubungan itu, saya dan rakan berbesar hati melantik Tuan/Puan sebagai pakar
pengesahan instrumen yang akan digunakan dalam kerja khusus yang berkaitan.
4. Kerjasama dan pertimbangan daripada pihak Tuan/Puan amatlah dihargai dan

didahului dengan ucapan ribuan terima kasih.
Sekian.
Yang benar,
Arunah Shivji
……………………….
(Arunah Shivji)
Pelajar Semester 3,
Ijazah Sarjana Pendidikan (Matematik)
Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris
27
FACULTY OF SCIENCE AND MATHEMATICS
SULTAN IDRIS EDUCATION UNIVERSITY
GREEN CHEMISTRY : TEACHER’S KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES AND

PRACTICES IN SJK(T) SIMPANG LIMA, KLANG.
This questionnaire is conducted to investigated the level of awareness, practices
and attitudes of green chemistry among the Simpang Lima Tamil school teachers.
Over the years different principles have been proposed that can be used when
thinking about the design, development and implementation of chemical products
and processes. These principles enable scientists and engineers to protect and
benefit the economy, people and the planet by finding creative and innovative
ways to reduce waste, conserve energy, and discover replacements for hazardous
substances.
This validation aimed to investigate the Green Chemistry topic. 40 questions were
created based on three main construct which are ‘Green Chemistry
awareness/Knowledge, Green Chemistry practices and Green Chemistry attitude’.
Please tick (/) your level of agreement to represent your opinion. All the responses
are only for the purpose of academic research will be confidential. Your
cooperation is appreciated. Thank you.
28
SECTION A : DEMOGRAPHIC DATA
Please TICK ( / ) in the approprite boxes or spaces provided .
1. AGES :
20- 25 1
26 - 30 2
31 - 35 3
> 35 4
2. Gender Male 1 :
Female 2
3. Ethnicity Malay 1 :
Indian 2
Chinese 3
Others 4
4. Year of study :…………………..
29
30
31
32
33
EXPERT
2
34
Guru Subjek kimia,
Tuan/Puan,

dilampirkan.

Sekian.
Yang benar,
Arunah Shivji
……………………….
(Arunah Shivji)
Pelajar Semester 3,
35

substances.
36
SECTION A : DEMOGRAPHIC DATA
Please TICK ( / ) in the approprite boxes or spaces provided .
5. AGES :
21- 25 1
26 - 30 2
31 - 35 3
> 35 4
6. Gender Male 1 :
Female 2
7. Ethnicity Malay 1 :
Indian 2
Chinese 3
Others 4
8. Year of study :…………………..
37
38
39
40
41
42
SAMPLE
RESPONDENT
43
Guru Subjek kimia,
Tuan/Puan,

dilampirkan.

Sekian.
Yang benar,
Arunah Shivji
……………………….
(Arunah Shivji)
Pelajar Semester 3,
44

substances.
45
46
47
48
49
50
REPORT
SUMMARY
BY CONSTRUCT
CONSTRUCT 1
51
Case Summariesa
B1GCK1 B1GCK2 B1GCK3 B1GCK4 B1GCK5 B1GCK6 B1GCK7 B1GCK8 B1GCK9 B1GCK10 B1GCK11 B1GCK12 B1GCK13
1 neutral agree agree agree agree agree Strongly agree Strongly agree agree agree Strongly
agree agree agree
2 agree agree agree Strongly agree neutral agree Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly agree
agree agree agree agree agree agree
3 agree neutral agree Strongly Strongly Strongly neutral Strongly agree Strongly Strongly Strongly agree
agree agree agree agree agree agree agree
4 agree agree agree agree agree agree Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly agree
5 Strongly neutral agree Strongly Strongly agree Strongly Strongly Strongly agree Strongly Strongly neutral
agree agree agree agree agree agree agree agree
6 neutral neutral agree agree agree agree agree agree Strongly agree Strongly Strongly agree
agree agree agree
7 agree agree agree Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly agree Strongly agree Strongly Strongly neutral
8 agree neutral agree agree Strongly agree Strongly Strongly Strongly agree Strongly Strongly agree
9 agree agree agree agree Strongly agree agree agree neutral agree Strongly Strongly Strongly
agree agree agree agree
10 agree agree agree Strongly agree Strongly Strongly agree Strongly agree agree agree agree
11 agree Strongly neutral agree neutral agree agree Strongly agree agree agree agree Strongly
agree agree agree
12 agree neutral agree Strongly agree Strongly Strongly agree Strongly agree agree agree agree
13 Strongly agree agree agree agree agree Strongly agree Strongly agree agree agree agree
agree agree agree
14 neutral neutral agree agree Strongly agree Strongly agree agree Strongly agree agree Strongly
52
15 agree Strongly agree Strongly Strongly agree Strongly neutral agree Strongly neutral neutral Strongly
16 agree agree neutral agree agree agree Strongly neutral Strongly Strongly neutral neutral agree
agree agree agree
17 agree agree Strongly Strongly agree agree agree neutral neutral Strongly agree agree agree
agree agree agree
18 Strongly Strongly agree agree agree neutral agree neutral neutral Strongly neutral agree Strongly
19 Strongly agree neutral agree agree agree agree neutral neutral Strongly agree agree Strongly
agree agree agree
20 agree neutral neutral Strongly agree neutral agree agree Strongly neutral neutral neutral agree
agree agree
21 agree agree agree agree Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly agree agree agree
agree Disagree Disagree agree Disagree agree
22 Strongly neutral agree Strongly agree agree neutral agree agree neutral agree neutral Strongly
agree agree agree
23 Strongly neutral Strongly agree neutral agree neutral agree agree agree agree agree agree
agree agree
24 agree agree neutral agree agree agree agree neutral agree Strongly agree neutral Strongly
agree agree
25 agree neutral disagree disagree disagree agree neutral neutral Strongly Strongly agree neutral agree
agree agree
26 agree agree neutral agree agree agree agree neutral agree Strongly agree neutral agree
agree
27 agree neutral neutral neutral neutral Strongly neutral neutral agree disagree agree neutral agree
agree
28 agree agree agree agree Strongly Strongly agree agree Strongly disagree agree neutral agree
agree agree agree
29 Strongly neutral agree Strongly agree agree neutral agree agree agree neutral neutral Strongly
agree agree agree
30 Strongly disagree disagree agree disagree Strongly agree disagree Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly
Disagree Disagree Disagree Disagree Disagree Disagree Disagree
53
Total N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30
a. Limited to first 100 cases.
54
CONSTRUCT 2
Case Summariesa
Case
Number B2GC1 B2GC2 B2GC3 B2GC4 B2GC5 B2GC6 B2GC7 B2GC8 B2GC9 B2GC10 B2GC11 B2GC12 B2GC13 B2GC14
1 1 agree agree neutral agree agree agree agree Strongly agree agree neutral agree agree Strongly
agree agree
2 2 agree neutral Strongly Strongly Strongly agree Strongly agree agree neutral Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly
3 3 agree agree Strongly neutral Strongly Strongly Strongly agree agree agree Strongly neutral Strongly agree
4 4 agree Strongly agree Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly agree Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly agree
agree agree agree agree agree agree agree agree agree agree
5 5 agree neutral Strongly Strongly Strongly agree Strongly agree agree neutral agree Strongly Strongly Strongly
6 6 Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly agree agree Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly agree Strongly agree Strongly
7 7 Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly agree agree Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly agree Strongly agree Strongly
8 8 Strongly Strongly agree Strongly agree Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly agree Strongly agree agree
agree agree agree agree agree agree agree agree agree
9 9 Strongly Strongly agree Strongly agree agree Strongly agree Strongly Strongly agree Strongly agree agree
10 10 Strongly Strongly neutral Strongly agree agree agree Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly agree Strongly
11 11 Strongly Strongly neutral Strongly agree agree agree Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly agree Strongly
12 12 Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly agree agree agree agree Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly agree Strongly
13 13 Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly agree agree agree agree Strongly Strongly agree Strongly agree agree
55
14 14 agree Strongly neutral Strongly agree Strongly agree Strongly agree Strongly neutral Strongly agree Strongly
15 15 agree Strongly Strongly Strongly neutral agree neutral Strongly agree Strongly agree Strongly neutral agree
16 16 agree Strongly Strongly agree neutral agree neutral agree agree Strongly agree Strongly neutral Strongly
agree agree agree agree agree
17 17 agree Strongly agree agree neutral neutral agree agree agree Strongly Strongly agree neutral Strongly
18 18 agree Strongly Strongly Strongly neutral neutral agree Strongly agree Strongly Strongly agree neutral agree
19 19 neutral agree agree agree neutral agree agree Strongly neutral agree Strongly agree neutral Strongly
agree agree agree
20 20 neutral agree Strongly agree agree neutral disagree disagree disagree disagree Strongly agree agree agree
agree agree
21 21 agree agree Strongly neutral agree Strongly neutral Strongly agree agree agree neutral agree agree
agree agree agree
22 22 agree agree Strongly neutral agree agree neutral neutral agree agree neutral neutral agree Strongly
agree agree
23 23 agree neutral Strongly neutral neutral Strongly neutral Strongly agree neutral Strongly neutral neutral agree
24 24 neutral neutral neutral neutral neutral agree neutral neutral neutral neutral neutral neutral neutral Strongly
agree
25 25 neutral neutral agree neutral neutral neutral neutral Strongly neutral neutral agree neutral neutral agree
agree
26 26 neutral neutral agree agree neutral agree neutral Strongly neutral neutral Strongly agree neutral agree
agree agree
27 27 neutral neutral agree Strongly neutral Strongly neutral agree neutral neutral agree Strongly neutral Strongly
28 28 neutral agree agree agree agree Strongly neutral Strongly neutral agree neutral agree agree agree
agree agree
29 29 neutral Strongly Strongly neutral agree Strongly neutral Strongly neutral Strongly agree neutral agree neutral
56
30 30 neutral agree neutral Strongly agree agree neutral agree neutral agree agree neutral agree Strongly
agree agree
Tota N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30
57
CONSTRUCT 3
Case Summariesa
Case
Number B3GC1 B3GC2 B3GC3 B3GC4 B3GC5 B3GC6 B3GC7 B3GC8 B3GC9 B3GC10 B3GC11 B3GC12 B3GC13
1 1 agree Strongly agree agree agree agree agree agree agree agree agree agree agree
agree
2 2 Strongly agree agree neutral agree Strongly Strongly Strongly agree Strongly agree agree neutral
3 3 Strongly agree agree agree agree Strongly agree Strongly agree Strongly agree agree agree
4 4 Strongly Strongly agree Strongly agree Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly agree Strongly
5 5 Strongly agree agree neutral agree Strongly agree Strongly agree Strongly Strongly agree neutral
6 6 Strongly agree Strongly Strongly agree agree neutral Strongly agree Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly
7 7 Strongly agree Strongly Strongly agree agree Strongly Strongly agree Strongly agree Strongly Strongly
8 8 Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly agree agree neutral Strongly Strongly Strongly agree Strongly Strongly
9 9 Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly agree agree Strongly Strongly agree Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly
10 10 agree Strongly Strongly Strongly agree agree neutral agree Strongly agree Strongly Strongly Strongly
11 11 agree neutral Strongly Strongly Strongly agree agree agree Strongly agree agree Strongly Strongly
12 12 agree agree Strongly Strongly Strongly agree agree agree agree agree Strongly Strongly Strongly
13 13 agree Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly agree Strongly agree Strongly agree agree Strongly Strongly
58
14 14 agree agree agree Strongly neutral agree agree agree agree agree Strongly agree Strongly
agree agree agree
15 15 neutral agree agree Strongly neutral neutral Strongly neutral neutral neutral Strongly agree Strongly
16 16 neutral Strongly agree Strongly neutral neutral agree neutral Strongly neutral agree agree Strongly
17 17 agree Strongly agree Strongly neutral neutral Strongly agree agree agree agree agree Strongly
18 18 agree agree agree Strongly agree neutral Strongly agree agree agree Strongly agree Strongly
19 19 agree Strongly neutral agree Strongly neutral Strongly agree Strongly agree Strongly neutral agree
20 20 neutral agree neutral agree disagree agree Strongly neutral agree neutral agree neutral agree
agree
21 21 neutral agree agree agree disagree agree agree neutral Strongly neutral agree agree agree
Disagree
22 22 neutral Strongly agree agree disagree agree Strongly neutral agree neutral Strongly agree agree
agree agree agree
23 23 neutral agree agree neutral Strongly neutral agree neutral Strongly neutral agree agree neutral
Disagree agree
24 24 neutral agree neutral neutral Strongly neutral agree neutral Strongly neutral Strongly neutral neutral
Disagree Disagree agree
25 25 neutral Strongly neutral neutral disagree neutral neutral neutral Strongly neutral Strongly neutral neutral
agree agree agree
26 26 neutral agree neutral neutral neutral neutral agree neutral agree neutral agree neutral neutral
27 27 neutral neutral neutral neutral neutral neutral agree neutral Strongly neutral agree neutral neutral
Disagree
28 28 neutral Strongly neutral agree neutral agree agree neutral agree neutral agree neutral agree
agree
29 29 neutral agree neutral Strongly neutral agree agree neutral agree neutral Strongly neutral Strongly
agree agree agree
59
30 30 neutral agree neutral agree agree agree agree neutral Strongly neutral agree neutral agree
Disagree
Total N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30
60

GROUP ASSIGNMENT (2) Arunah N Saranya New

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

GROUP ASSIGNMENT (2) Arunah N Saranya New

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

ARUNAH SHIVJI M20171000598

SARANYA KALIAPPAN M20171000148

UNIVERSITI PENDIDIKAN SULTAN

LECTURER : DR. HAFSAH BINTI TAHA

SARANYA KALIAPPAN M20171000148

OBJECTIVE AND RESEARCH QUESTION 3

VALIDATION AND REABLITY OF QUESTIONNAIRE 4-21

SARANYA KALIAPPAN M20171000148

First of all we want to thank Almighty for giving me a chance to accomplish

SARANYA KALIAPPAN M20171000148

Reliability is the degree to which an assessment tool produces stable and

Validity and reliability are important concepts in measuring instruments. A

SARANYA KALIAPPAN M20171000148

i) To evaluate understanding level about Green Chemistry among the teachers.

ii) To identify teachers attitude towards Green Chemistry.

1. What are the likely pathways for the green chemistry?

4. In what ways do the understanding, interpretation, and assimilation of information

SARANYA KALIAPPAN M20171000148

ITEM EXPERT 1 EXPERT 2 AGREE DISAGREE

SARANYA KALIAPPAN M20171000148

SARANYA KALIAPPAN M20171000148

This questionnaire consists of 40 questions. 40 questions were created

In this questionnaire the agreement proportion is 35/40 or 0.875. While the

NUMBER OF AGREE – NUMBER OF DISAGREE

TOTAL NUMBER OF ITEM

SARANYA KALIAPPAN M20171000148

CONSTRUCT 1 : GREEN CHEMISTRY KNOWLEDGE

ITEM EXPERT 1 EXPERT 2 AGREE DISAGREE

Construct 1 that is Green Chemistry Knowledge consists of 13 questions.

SARANYA KALIAPPAN M20171000148

CONSTRUCT 2 : GREEN CHEMISTRY ATTITUDE

ITEM EXPERT 1 EXPERT 2 AGREE DISAGREE

SARANYA KALIAPPAN M20171000148

Construct 2 that is Green Chemistry Attitude consists of 14 questions. The

SARANYA KALIAPPAN M20171000148

CONSTRUCT 3 : GREEN CHEMISTRY PRACTICES

ITEM EXPERT 1 EXPERT 2 AGREE DISAGREE

Construct 3 that is Green Chemistry Practices consists of 13 questions.

SARANYA KALIAPPAN M20171000148

SARANYA KALIAPPAN M20171000148

A reliability coefficient is a measure of how well a test measures achievement. It is

SARANYA KALIAPPAN M20171000148

B3GC1 157.9667 276.930 .815 .928

B3GC2 157.4667 296.051 .183 .933

B3GC3 157.8333 279.247 .798 .928

B3GC4 157.5333 283.292 .584 .930

B3GC5 158.4000 276.938 .602 .930

B3GC6 158.0000 289.310 .464 .931

B3GC7 157.5667 297.426 .100 .934

B3GC8 157.9667 276.930 .815 .928

B3GC9 157.9333 275.995 .545 .931

B3GC10 157.9667 276.930 .815 .928

B3GC11 157.3333 297.195 .159 .933

B3GC12 157.8333 279.247 .798 .928

B3GC13 157.5333 283.292 .584 .930

B1GCK1 157.7667 293.702 .212 .933

B1GCK2 158.1667 292.489 .294 .932

B1GCK3 158.1000 286.507 .557 .930

B1GCK4 157.5333 291.085 .367 .932

B1GCK5 157.7333 284.823 .527 .930

B1GCK6 157.9000 286.852 .383 .932

B1GCK7 157.7333 283.651 .493 .931

B1GCK8 157.9333 283.582 .579 .930