Scheduled for Research Consortium Free Communication: Teaching Adapted Physical Education, Thursday, March 15, 2007, 4:15 PM - 5:15 PM, Convention Center: 327


Validation of the Physical Educators' Intentions Toward Teaching Individuals with Disabilities II Preservice Survey

Terry L. Rizzo, California State University, Redlands, CA, Hosung So, California State University at San Bernardino, San Bernardino, CA and April Tripp, Towson University, Towson, MD

This study assessed the validity of the Physical Educators' Intentions Toward Teaching Individuals with Disabilities II Preservice Survey (PEITID-II-PS) using the Theory of Planned Behavior (TpB; Ajzen, 2000) for survey development. Validity was modeled on the recommendations from Messick's (1995) six aspects of validity, Allen and Yen (1979) for sampling validity, and Kerlinger (1986) for content validity. A total of 226 preservice teachers (PTs) in PETE were randomly selected from six comprehensive universities in California. Of the 265 PETE majors, 226 (85%, 123 males, 103 females;M age=24.69, SD=5.49) participated and completed the survey. Each participant completed the PEITID-II-PS, consisting of 35 items; two-items for intention (I), three for attitude toward the behavior (ATB), two for subjective norm (SN), four perceived behavior control (PBC), six behavioral beliefs (Ab), 12 normative beliefs (SNb), and six control beliefs (PBCb). All items use a 7-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). To compute an indirect measure of Ab, SNb, PBCb in accordance with an expectancy-value model as described in the TpB, the belief strength is multiplied by outcome evaluation, and the resulting products are summed over all accessible behavioral outcomes. The results from this study offer preliminary support for the psychometric properties of the PEITID-II-PS. Test-retest (5-day interval) reliabilities g for I, ATB, SN, PBC, Ab, SNb, and PBCb were .93, .90, .94, .89, .90, .92, and 93, respectively (p<.001). Cronbach's alpha coefficients for I, ATB, SN,PBC, Ab, SNb, and PBCb were .83, .77, .88, .77, .73, .77, and .74, respectively. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) revealed the initial model a relatively adequate fit of the hypothesized model to the data, Χ2(91)=232.88, p<.001, Χ2/df=2.56, RMSEA= .08, PCFI= .66, GFI= .88, CFI= .87. The results indicate that the TpB and the PEITID-II-PS offer a very promising approach to PETE and APE professionals interested in assessing I, ATB, SN, PBC, Ab, SNb, and PBCb constructs associated with teaching students with disabilities in general physical education classes. That notwithstanding, the results are viewed cautiously due to the relatively small sample size (Bentler, 2004) and the importance of theoretically-driven valid research. As such, a follow up CFA with a larger sample allowing for cross-validation is warranted so that we can establish more precise information about the validity of the factor structure of the PEITID-II-PS.
Keyword(s): adapted physical activity, pre-service/student, research

Back to the 2007 AAHPERD National Convention and Exposition (March 13 -- 17, 2007)