The daisy model for collaborative action research: application to educational practice

The Daisy Model is a conceptualisation of the way in which a core group of experienced and novice action researchers may work on a range of related mini-projects that contribute to organisational improvement. This model enables the spread of action research from one or two enthusiasts to others in an organisation. It allows for changes in individual commitment and organisational context as the research progresses. Development of this model has occurred since 1995, during several projects related to educational practice in New Zealand polytechnics. In 1997 the model was applied to the collaborative improvement of policies and procedures for recognition of prior learning at two polytechnics. This article describes the model and its application and examines the roles of the facilitator(s) and the types of activities that occur within the central core group and petal mini-project groups of the Daisy     

The “None of the Above” Option in Multiple-Choice Testing: An Experimental Study

The authors assessed the effects of using “none of the above” as an option in a 40-item, general-knowledge multiple-choice test administered to undergraduate students. Examinees who selected “none of the above” were given an incentive to write the correct answer to the question posed. Using “none of the above” as the keyed option made items much more difficult (d = ?1.11). Furthermore, 45% of the time that examinees correctly selected “none of the above,” they wrote either a wrong answer (19%) or no answer (26%), and rescoring items to deny credit in these cases caused item discrimination to fall (d = ?0.35). Thus, when “none of the above” is the keyed option, credit earned by examinees with knowledge deficiencies can make items appear to have more discriminatory power than is actually the case. The authors recommend that “none of the above” should not be used as an option in multiple-choice items.     

Developing a Measure of Perceived Environmental Risk

Abstract

This study conceptually and empirically develops a scale that measures perceptions of environmental risk (PER). PER is a measure that is different from the measure of environmental knowledge but equally important because people tend to act on their perceptions regardless of whether they are accurate. A reliable and valid assessment of perceived environmental risk is important for environmental education because it will provide a general overview of the present state of perceptions regarding environmental risk, and it will provide measures of specific environmental issues. Therefore, this type of scale either can provide a comprehensive measure for environmental education programs or can measure specific selected items that apply to certain situations or programs, or both. Administrators and teachers could use this scale to indicate the effectiveness of environmental education programs. We define perceptions of environmental risk as a general measurement of risk which assesses the degree to which one perceives danger, peril, or hazards to either self, community, society, or all three, in regard to specific environmental issues. In developing this scale, we used various heterogenous groups across multiple studies to affirm the scale's validity and reliability.     

Situational and Demographic Influences on Transfer System Characteristics in Organizations

Transfer theories, which are closely related to evaluation theory, have been developed from a holistic perspective, but most of empirical transfer research has not effectively utilized holistic models to investigate transfer of learning until the late 1990s. Additionally, little has been done in examining the relationship between situational variables, demographic variables, and transfer system characteristics. This study contributes to transfer research by examining the combined effects of situational and demographic variables on a holistic model of perceived organizational transfer systems. A key finding was that demographic variables make only a marginal contribution to predicting transfer system characteristics when compared to situational variables. It seems clear that the differences in transfer system characteristics depend on diverse situational influences, primarily due to types of training programs and types of organizational cultures. This finding does not support one‐size‐fits‐all transfer interventions. Future research may focus on investigating benchmark transfer practices in certain types of organizations or industries to empirically identify the true leverage points of a diagnosing instrument of transfer—the Learning Transfer System Inventory—for interventions and change.