DEVELOPING AN EVALUATION INSTRUMENT FOR ASSESSING PUBLIC RELATION PRACTITIONER PERFORMANCE IN EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS

Su Aw
{"title":"DEVELOPING AN EVALUATION INSTRUMENT FOR ASSESSING PUBLIC RELATION PRACTITIONER PERFORMANCE IN EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS","authors":"Su Aw","doi":"10.22452/MOJEM.VOL7NO1.2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This research aims at developing evaluation instruments to measure PR practitioners’ performance in educational institutions. Operationally, the objectives of this study include: (1) developing components, indicators, and instrument items for evaluating PR performance in educational institutions, (2) examining the validity and reliability of the instruments, and (3) investigating the readability of the instruments which has been developed. To achieve this goal, researchers conducted Design and Development research by mixing quantitative and qualitative approaches. The subject of this research, in the first stage namely to design instruments, develop components and indicators, included 10 respondents who were chosen purposively consisting of evaluation experts (2 people), and PR practitioners (8 people). The second stage involved 12 respondents from public relations practitioners intended to reveal the validity and reliability of the instruments. The third stage, to know the readability of the instrument, involved 50 respondents from PR practitioners. The data were collected using Focus Group Discussion technique in the first stage and assessment sheet in the second and third stage. The data analysis technique in the first stage was an interactive analysis of Miles, Huberman, and Saldana (2014). To analyse the validity of the instrument, the researcher employed content validity based on the expert panel assessment, and analysed it with the Aiken V formula. The Cronbach Alpha coefficient criteria with at least 0.7 was applied for reliability test to determine the conformity between the results of the assessment carried out by two assessors (rater). The data analysis technique for examining the feasibility of the instrument viewed from the readability aspect is based on the mean score > 3.4 - 4.2 out of 5 or in the feasible classification, referring to the conversion of quantitative data to qualitative data on a scale of 5. The results of the research were: (1) The components of PR practitioners performance in this research include fostering good relations with the internal public, promoting good relations with the external public, and improving the capacity of public relations practitioners; (2) 26 instruments meet the requirements for validity and reliability, the Aiken V validity coefficient is > 0.69 and the reliability coefficient is α = 0.978> 0.7; (3) The readability of instruments is in a good or appropriate category for use as indicated by the mean score of 3.91 out of 5. The implication of this research includes help ease school leaders, industry leaders, and policymakers to evaluate the performance of PR practitioners.","PeriodicalId":37473,"journal":{"name":"Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Management","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22452/MOJEM.VOL7NO1.2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

This research aims at developing evaluation instruments to measure PR practitioners’ performance in educational institutions. Operationally, the objectives of this study include: (1) developing components, indicators, and instrument items for evaluating PR performance in educational institutions, (2) examining the validity and reliability of the instruments, and (3) investigating the readability of the instruments which has been developed. To achieve this goal, researchers conducted Design and Development research by mixing quantitative and qualitative approaches. The subject of this research, in the first stage namely to design instruments, develop components and indicators, included 10 respondents who were chosen purposively consisting of evaluation experts (2 people), and PR practitioners (8 people). The second stage involved 12 respondents from public relations practitioners intended to reveal the validity and reliability of the instruments. The third stage, to know the readability of the instrument, involved 50 respondents from PR practitioners. The data were collected using Focus Group Discussion technique in the first stage and assessment sheet in the second and third stage. The data analysis technique in the first stage was an interactive analysis of Miles, Huberman, and Saldana (2014). To analyse the validity of the instrument, the researcher employed content validity based on the expert panel assessment, and analysed it with the Aiken V formula. The Cronbach Alpha coefficient criteria with at least 0.7 was applied for reliability test to determine the conformity between the results of the assessment carried out by two assessors (rater). The data analysis technique for examining the feasibility of the instrument viewed from the readability aspect is based on the mean score > 3.4 - 4.2 out of 5 or in the feasible classification, referring to the conversion of quantitative data to qualitative data on a scale of 5. The results of the research were: (1) The components of PR practitioners performance in this research include fostering good relations with the internal public, promoting good relations with the external public, and improving the capacity of public relations practitioners; (2) 26 instruments meet the requirements for validity and reliability, the Aiken V validity coefficient is > 0.69 and the reliability coefficient is α = 0.978> 0.7; (3) The readability of instruments is in a good or appropriate category for use as indicated by the mean score of 3.91 out of 5. The implication of this research includes help ease school leaders, industry leaders, and policymakers to evaluate the performance of PR practitioners.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
发展一套评估工具,以评估教育机构公共关系从业人员的表现
本研究旨在开发评估工具,以衡量教育机构公关从业人员的绩效。在操作上,本研究的目标包括:(1)开发评估教育机构公关绩效的组成部分、指标和工具项目;(2)检验工具的效度和可靠性;(3)调查已开发的工具的可读性。为了实现这一目标,研究人员通过混合定量和定性方法进行了设计和开发研究。本研究的主题,在第一阶段,即设计工具,制定组件和指标,包括10名有目的选择的受访者,包括评估专家(2人)和公关从业人员(8人)。第二阶段涉及来自公共关系从业人员的12名受访者,旨在揭示工具的有效性和可靠性。第三阶段,了解文书的可读性,涉及50名公关从业人员的受访者。第一阶段采用焦点小组讨论法收集数据,第二和第三阶段采用评估表收集数据。第一阶段的数据分析技术是Miles、Huberman和Saldana(2014)的互动分析。为了分析仪器的效度,研究者采用了基于专家小组评估的内容效度,并使用Aiken V公式进行分析。采用至少为0.7的Cronbach Alpha系数标准进行信度检验,以确定两位评估者(评价者)评估结果的一致性。从易读性方面考察仪器可行性的数据分析技术是基于平均得分> 3.4 - 4.2分(满分5分)或可行性分类,即在5分的范围内将定量数据转换为定性数据。研究结果表明:(1)本研究中公关从业人员绩效的构成要素包括培养良好的内部公众关系、促进良好的外部公众关系和提高公关从业人员的能力;(2) 26台仪器满足效度和信度要求,Aiken V效度系数为>.69,信度系数α = 0.978 >.7;(3)仪器的可读性处于良好或适合使用的类别,平均得分为3.91分(满分为5分)。本研究的意义在于帮助学校领导、行业领导和政策制定者评估公关从业者的绩效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Malaysian Journal of Educational Management is interested in features manuscripts concerning recent research and developments, professional issues, administrative and leadership concerns, and creative strategies and policies to improve educational management. MOJEM publishes original contributions on educational management , administration and leadership in the widest sense: on the management planning, policy decisions, finance, human recourse development, organizational behavior, change management and alternatives in schools as well as further and higher education institutions. By promoting critical discussion on current innovations within these areas, the journal represents an excellent forum for highlighting the profile of educational management on both a national and international level. MOJEM covers the recent research and practices on key debates and controversies within the broad field of educational management planning and policy. The journal also blends the best of educational research and practice, making it a valuable resource for educators, management, policy makers, administrators, researchers, teachers, and post graduate students. Anyone in the profession of educational management may submit her/his manuscript(s) for publication consideration in MOJEM. All submission will be double-blind reviewe by at least two professional reviewers with expertise in the relevant areas . Articles may be contributed at any time for publication consideration.
期刊最新文献
THE PRINCIPAL’S TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP APPROACH BASED ON LOCAL WISDOM IN STRENGTHENING THE CHARACTER OF STUDENTS THE MEDIATING EFFECT OF ORGANISATIONAL CULTURE ON ACADEMIC LEADERSHIP SKILLS AND STUDENTS’ SKILL-BASED LEARNING OUTCOMES IN SAUDI HIGHER EDUCATION FACTORS AFFECTING UNIVERSITY STUDENTS’ LIFELONG LEARNING IN INDONESIA AN INVESTIGATION INTO ISSUES IMPEDING HIGHER EDUCATION EFFECTIVENESS IN PUBLIC UNIVERSITIES PERCEPTUAL GAP AMONG CORPORATE WORLD, ACADEMICS AND STUDENTS: PERSONAL QUALITIES AND EMPLOYABILITY COMPETENCIES OF STUDENTS
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1