Content validation of instruments for evaluating school principal academic supervision programmes and teachers’ well-being in the implementation of the Cambridge Curriculum
This study aimed to develop and evaluate instruments to assess principals’ academic supervision programmes and teacher well-being in implementing the Cambridge Curriculum. The study used a research and development (R&D) approach, including indicator formulation, item development, expert validation, and field testing. The academic supervision instrument had 20 items, while the teacher well-being instrument had 24 items. Content validity was assessed by five expert validators using Aiken’s V index. The field trial involved 19 elementary school teachers implementing the Cambridge Curriculum. Data were analysed using Aiken’s V, Corrected Item-Total Correlation, and Cronbach’s Alpha. The findings indicated that all items achieved very high content validity. Empirical validity testing showed that 18 items of the academic supervision instrument and 23 items of the teacher well-being instrument met the validity criteria. Reliability analysis yielded Cronbach’s Alpha coefficients of .925 and .928, respectively. These findings indicate that both instruments have satisfactory validity and reliability and are suitable for future studies on Cambridge Curriculum implementation.
Downloads
DAFTAR PUSTAKA
Aiken, L. R. (1985). Three coefficients for analyzing the reliability and validity of ratings. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 45(1), 131–142.
Borg, W. R., & Gall, M. D. (2003). Educational research: An introduction (7th ed.). Allyn & Bacon.
Cambridge Assessment International Education. (2023). The Cambridge pathway. Cambridge University Press & Assessment.
Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16(3), 297–334.
Collie, R. J. (2021). COVID-19 and teachers’ somatic burden, stress, and emotional exhaustion: Examining the role of principal leadership and workplace buoyancy. AERA Open, 7, 1–15.
Collie, R. J. (2024).
The Tripartite Occupational Well-Being Scale: Evidence of Validity Among Teachers. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 42(1), 46–59.
DeVellis, R. F., & Thorpe, C. T. (2021). Scale development: Theory and applications (5th ed.). Sage Publications.
Dreer, B. (2024). Teacher well-being: A systematic review and future directions. Educational Psychology Review, 36(1), 1–30.
Glickman, C. D., Gordon, S. P., & Ross-Gordon, J. M. (2018). SuperVision and instructional leadership: A developmental approach (10th ed.). Pearson.
Hascher, T., & Waber, J. (2021). Teacher well-being: A systematic review of the research literature. Educational Research Review, 34, 100411.
Hinkin, T. R. (1998). A brief tutorial on the development of measures for use in survey questionnaires. Organizational Research Methods, 1(1), 104–121.
Sergiovanni, T. J., & Starratt, R. J. (2013). Supervision: A redefinition (9th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
Sugiyono. (2022). Metode penelitian dan pengembangan (Research and Development/R&D). Alfabeta.
Tavakol, M., & Dennick, R. (2011).
Making Sense of Cronbach's Alpha. International Journal of Medical Education, 2, 53–55.
Zhou, X., Li, Y., & Wang, H. (2024). Factors associated with teacher well-being: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 36(2), 1–28.
Copyright (c) 2026 Jurnal Kependidikan: Penelitian Inovasi Pembelajaran
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
