ISSN: 2222-6990
Open access
The “Learn, Pick, Flip, Check, Reward” (LPFCR) Card Game was developed to enhance Primary 4 Pupils' comprehension of homophones. This paper reports the pilot test of the instruments used in the implementation of the game. It aims to examine the validity and reliability of the instruments. Four data collection instruments which were the pre and post tests, observation checklist and questionnaire were analyzed statistically and thematically through the method of data analysis. 20 Primary 4 pupils of similar characteristics with the actual samples were involved in this pilot study. Findings of the pilot tests revealed that both pre and post tests achieved a high internal consistency and reliability of over, ?<0.8. Meanwhile, the observation checklist was analyzed thematically and was found to be valid and reliable as similarity in the given themes of observations were obtained. The questionnaire was analyzed through SPSS Version 25 and a reliability coefficient of over, ?<0.8 was obtained, which also indicated high internal consistency and reliability. These results proved that the instruments are valid and reliable to be used in evaluating the LPFCR card game.
Appelman, A., & Sundar, S. S. (2016). Measuring Message Credibility: Construction and Validation of an Exclusive Scale. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 93(1), 59–79. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699015606057
Braun, V., Clarke, V., Hayfield, N., & Terry, G. (2019). Thematic Analysis. In P. Liamputtong (Ed.), Handbook of Research Methods in Health Social Sciences (pp. 843–860). Singapore: Springer Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-5251-4_103
Charman, S. (2017). The Research: Aims and Methods. In Police Socialisation, Identity and Culture: Becoming Blue (pp. 171–187). Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63070-0_7
Chu, H., & Ke, Q. (2017). Research methods: What’s in the name? Library & Information Science Research, 39(4), 284–294. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2017.11.001
Creswell, J. W., & Guetterman, T. C. (2019). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research (6th Editio). New York, NY: Pearson.
Dautrichea, I., Fiblad, L., Fievetb, A.-C., & Christopheb, A. (2018). Learning Homophones In Context: Easy Cases Are Favored In The Lexicon Of Natural Languages. Cognitive Psychology, 104(August), 83–105. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2018.04.001
Dick, B. (2015). Reflections on the SAGE Encyclopedia of Action Research and What It Says About Action Research and Its Methodologies. Action Research, 13(4), 431–444. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476750315573593
Hambleton, R. K., & Li, S. (2014). Criterion-Referenced Assessment. Wiley StatsRef: Statistics Reference Online, 1–8.
Hazzi, O., & Maldaon, I. (2015). A Pilot Study: Vital Methodological Issues. Verslas: Teorija Ir Praktika, 16(1), 53–62. https://doi.org/10.3846/btp.2015.437
Heale, R., & Twycross, A. (2015). Validity and reliability in quantitative studies. Evidence-Based Nursing, 18(3), 66–67. https://doi.org/10.1136/eb-2015-102129
Hult, F. M., & Johnson, D. C. (2015). Research Methods in Language Policy And Planning: A Practical Guide. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
Kenan, D., & Hakk?, E. ?. (2018). Teaching Homographs, Homonyms, Homophones, Synonyms, and Antonyms. In The TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching (pp. 1–6). American Cancer Society. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118784235.eelt0753
Kinchin, G., Ismail, N., & Edwards, J.-A. (2018). Pilot study, Does it really matter? Learning lessons from conducting a pilot study for a qualitative PhD thesis. International Journal of Social Science Research, 6(1). Retrieved from https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/416716/
Klenke, K., Martin, S., & Wallace, J. R. (2016). Qualitative Research in the Study of Leadership. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/doi:10.1108/9781785606502
Lin, T.-J., & Tsai, C.-C. (2017). Developing instruments concerning scientific epistemic beliefs and goal orientations in learning science: a validation study. International Journal of Science Education, 39(17), 2382–2401. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1384593
Lok, B., McNaught, C., & Young, K. (2016). Criterion-referenced and norm-referenced assessments: compatibility and complementarity. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(3), 450–465. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2015.1022136
Mikuska, E. (2017). The Importance of Piloting or Pre-Testing Semi-Structured Interviews and Narratives. SAGE Research Methods Cases. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473977754
Mimi, M. M., Nor, L. S., Lai, C. S., & Kahirol, M. S. (2015). Measuring the Validity and Reliability of Research Instruments. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 204(August), 164–171. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.08.129
Ministry of Education. (2015). Standard Curriculum Document (DSKP) Year 4, 5 and 6.
Nardi, P. M. (2018). Doing Survey Research: A Guide to Quantitative Method (4th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
Noble, H., & Smith, J. (2015). Issues of validity and relia
In-Text Citation: (Wong & Yamat, 2020)
To Cite this Article: Wong, A., & Yamat, H. (2020). Testing the Validity and Reliability of the “Learn, Pick, Flip, Check, Reward” (LPFCR) Card Game in Homophone Comprehension. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 10(1), 22–32.
Copyright: © 2020 The Author(s)
Published by Human Resource Management Academic Research Society (www.hrmars.com)
This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this license may be seen at: http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode