71

CHAPTER III

PLAN AND PROCEDURE OF RESEARCH

“There is nothing more unequal than the equal treatment of Unequals”

- Thomas Jefferson

3.1. INTRODUCTION

Educational research involves asking questions, collecting data, and analyzing

data to determine the answer to the question. It helps educators understand
problems or issues through the accumulation of knowledge.

The educational researcher today needs a large number of approaches to study the
complex educational issues in our educational system. No longer can we, as
educators, use only experiments or surveys to address our research problems.
Educational research now a day involves use of multiple research designs and
procedures to have in depth understanding of the problem of study.

The present chapter discusses the methodological framework of the study. This
chapter begins with a rationale of implementing multi method research approach
for developing a multiple intelligences based teacher education model for pre –
service teachers. As the chapter progresses it discusses the context of the study
and the participants in the research and concludes with description of data
collection and data analysis procedures.

In this chapter the researcher has described the research design and procedure
used for the study, starting with the planning stage and wrapping up at data
analysis stage.
 72

3.1.1. Importance of Plan and Procedure

The plan and procedure is important for demonstrating that the researcher has
developed a clear, organized and logical research design. It helps in:
 Providing an overview of the proposed design and the conceptual framework
supporting it.
 Relating the objectives of the study to a proposed plan and procedure
 Describing details related to specific methodology; rationale for selecting a
method
 Discussing new concepts, approaches, tools and techniques
 Describing the data collection and result analysis process used
 Explaining the used statistical techniques
 Detailing the proposed work plan and timeline
 Considering and discussing potential limitations and alternative approaches to
achieve study objectives

3.2. TYPE OF RESEARCH

Research studies are classified as Basic or Fundamental research, Applied
Research and Action Research. The present research is Applied in nature.

3.2.1. Applied Research

Applied research has most of the characteristics of fundamental research,
including the use of sampling techniques and the subsequent inferences about the
target population. Aim of applied research is to improve a product or a process
and testing theoretical concepts in actual problem situations. It attempts to
develop generalizations about teaching – learning process, instructional materials
and so on.

3.3. RESEARCH METHOD

3.3.1. Multi Method Procedure was used for this study. Multi method research
design entails application of two or more sources of data or research methods to
 73

the investigation of a research question or to different but highly linked research

questions (Bryman, n.d.). Table 2 shows the research methodology used as per the
objectives of the present research study:

TABLE 2

Research Method selected by the Researcher as per the objectives of the

study

Objective Method
Objective
No. Selected
To assess and analyze the existing status in the
teacher education colleges regarding the multiple
1 Survey
intelligences theory based classroom practices
followed by the teacher educators.
To assess and analyze the existing status in the
teacher education colleges regarding the multiple
2 Survey
intelligences theory based classroom practices
followed by the pre service teachers.
To develop a Multiple Intelligences theory based
Teacher Education model (MARC) using
framework of teacher education models to train Product
3
pre service teachers in teacher education colleges Development
using multiple intelligences in their teaching
learning practices.
Survey for
To establish usability of the developed MARC
4 establishing
Model.
usability

3.3.2. Mixed Method Research Design

Mixed method is a procedure for collecting, analyzing and ‘mixing’ both

quantitative and qualitative methods in a single study or a series of studies to
 74

understand a research problem (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2011). The main idea is
that the use of both quantitative and qualitative methods in combination provides
a better understanding of the research problem than either type by itself. Table 3
shows the difference between Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed methods.

TABLE 3
Quantitative, Mixed and Qualitative Methods

Aspects Quantitative Mixed Qualitative

Words, images,
Nature of Mix of variables,
Variables categories,
data words, images
patterns
Instrument based
Tools for
questions: Both open and closed Open ended
data
Questionnaires, ended questions questions
collection
interviews etc.
Statistical analysis
Codes, Themes,
Data and codes, themes,
Statistical analysis Patterns and
Analysis patterns and
Interpretations
interpretations

Mixed Methods research is formally defined as the class of research where the
researcher mixes or combines qualitative and quantitative research techniques,
methods, approaches, concepts into a single study. Figure 15 shows six types of
mixed methods designs:
 75

Convergent
Parallel
Design Explanatory
Sequential
Multi Phase Design
Design
Mixed
Method
Designs
Exploratory
Transformative Sequential
Design Design

Embedded
Design

FIGURE 15: Mixed Method Designs

The above mixed method designs are based on four questions namely; What
priority or weight does the researcher give to the quantitative and qualitative data
collection? What is the sequence of collecting the quantitative and qualitative
data? How does the researcher actually analyze the data? Where in the study does
the researcher “mix” the data?
The Mixed Methods design selected for the present study was Convergent Parallel
Mixed Methods. Figure 16 shows the process of the design.

QUAN
Quantitative Data
Collection &
Analysis Compare
Interpretation
or relate
Qual
Quantitative Data
Collection &

Point of
Interface

Figure 16: Convergent Parallel Design (Creswell, 2015)

 76

Convergent mixed method approach is where the researcher gathers both

quantitative and qualitative data, analyses both data separately, compares the
results from the analysis of both data and finally make an interpretation as to
whether the results support or contradict each other. The researcher in this study
compared both the datasets to provide a ‘convergence’ of data sources. The
comparison may occur in several ways. The most popular is to describe the
quantitative and qualitative results side by side in a discussion section of a study.
Another approach is to actually merge the quantitative and qualitative data in a
single table. Third approach is to transform one of the datasets so that they can be
directly compared with the other dataset.

Second approach of data interpretation was used where the researcher collects
quantitative and qualitative data separately and analyzes it. Both the data is
merged to interpret the results.

QUAN
Survey
Questionnaire Chi
Square
Usability
Questionnaires

Compare Interpretation
Qual or relate
Survey
Questionnaire
(Grounded
Theory) Usability
Questionnaires
(Grounded

FIGURE 17: Convergent Parallel Mixed Method used in the Present Study

Following the above approach in the present study as represented in figure 17, a
survey was conducted where both quantitative and qualitative data were collected
and analyzed. A MARC (Multiple Intelligences based Applied Reflective and
 77

Crafts) Integrated Teacher Education Model was developed and its usability was
established. For usability teacher educators implemented the model on pre service
teachers and gathered quantitative and qualitative data which was later analyzed.
The quantitative and qualitative data were analyzed separately. Quantitative data
was analyzed using statistical procedures and Grounded Theory Approach was
used for analyzing qualitative data. Finally the interpretation of the data was done
by taking the results of both the quantitative and qualitative data using the side by
side comparison. (Creswell, 2015)

3.4. Research at a Glance

The figure 18 gives an idea about the present research at a glance:

Applied
Research

Multi Method
Research

Mixed Method
Design (QUAN
+ Qual)

Convergent
Parallel
Design

Figure 18: Research at a Glance

 78

3.5. Procedure:

Analysis of Survey Collection of data Development of

Data and from Teacher the tools for
Interpretation Educators & Pre Survey, Validation
service teachers from Experts and
Pilot testing

Development of Collecting Conducting Pilot

MARC Model feedback from the testing and
experts about the Finalization of the
Model tool

Collecting data after Giving MARC

completion of the model model to Teacher
using questionnaire from Educators for
teacher educators and pre Implementing on
service teachers Pre service
teachers

Analysis the data

obtained to
establish usability Collecting
feedback after
each Intelligence
session

Drawing
conclusions of the
study

Figure 19: Procedure of the Study

 79

OBJECTIVE 1: To assess and analyze the existing status in the teacher

education colleges regarding the multiple intelligences theory based
classroom practices followed by the teacher educators.

3.6. Survey Method:

Survey research method is procedures in quantitative research in which

researchers administer a survey to a sample or to entire population of people to
describe the attitudes, opinions, behaviors, or characteristics of the population.
During survey researchers collect data using survey questionnaires, mailed
survey, phone survey, face to face interviews, focus group interviews and web
survey.
There are basically two types of survey designs:
1. Cross-sectional Survey Design
a. Attitudes & Practices
b. Group comparisons
c. Community needs
d. National assessment
e. Program evaluation
2. Longitudinal Survey Design
a. Trend studies
b. Cohort studies
c. Panel Studies
For the present study Cross – sectional survey was used.

The survey method gathers data from a relatively large number of cases at a
particular time. It is not concerned with the characteristics of individuals as
individuals; it is concerned with the statistics that result when data are abstracted
from a number of individual cases. (Best & Kahn, 2005)

3.6.1. Objectives of the Survey:

The survey was conducted on Teacher Educators to:

 80

1. Assess the present status of multiple intelligences used by them during their
teaching and guidance.
2. Assess the usage of activities related to Verbal intelligence.
3. Assess the usage of activities catering to Visual Intelligence.
4. Assess the usage of activities related to Logical – mathematical intelligence.
5. Assess the usage of activities for catering Bodily – Kinesthetic Intelligence.
6. Assess the use of activities related to Intrapersonal intelligence.
7. Assess the usage of activities catering to Interpersonal Intelligence.
8. Assess use of Musical Intelligence activities while conducting lectures and
guidance.
9. Assess the use of activities related to Naturalistic Intelligence.
10. Gauge the understanding of Multiple Intelligences based classroom practices
and willingness to learn about it.
11. Assess the use of lesson planning methods and awareness about the same.
12. Evaluate their reflections on qualities as a teacher
13. To explore the reflective practices followed by teacher educators.
14. To find out the opinion of the teacher educators regarding awareness about
reflective practices and willingness to learn about the same.

3.6.2. Population and Sampling:

A population is any group of individuals who has one or more characteristics in
common that are of interest to the researcher.
A sample is a subgroup of the target population that the researcher plans to study
for generalization about the target population. (Creswell, 2015)

3.6.2.1. Population: All the Teacher Educators teaching in teacher Education

Colleges affiliated to Savitribai Phule Pune University in Pune City.
3.6.2.2. Sample: For the survey 33 Teacher Educators teaching in Teacher
Education Colleges affiliated to Savitribai Phule Pune University in Pune
City were selected. Figure 20 given below shows the Population and
Sample of the Survey.
 81

3.6.2.3. Sample Unit: Teacher Educators teaching in Teacher Education colleges

affiliated to Savitribai Phule Pune University in Pune City.

3.6.2.4. Sampling:
Purposive sampling was used for the present study. Purposive sampling may be
defined as selecting units (e.g. individuals, groups of individuals, institutions)
based on specific purposes associated with answering a research study’s questions
(Teddlie & Yu, 2007)

Survey

Sample Size: 33
Population: All the Teacher
Teacher Educators
Educators teaching in teacher teaching in teacher
Education College’s affiliated to
education colleges
SPPU in Pune City.
affiliated to SPPU
Figure 20: Population and Sample for the Survey

3.6.3. Tools used in the survey:

Questionnaire on use
of multiple
Data Collection Intelligences
Tools
Questionnaire on
Reflective Practices

Percentage & Chi

Square
Tools used for Data Analysis
Survey Tools
Grounded Theory

Tables
Data
Representation
Tools
Figures

FIGURE 21: Tools for the Survey

 82

3.6.3.1. Tools for Data Collection

For data collection two questionnaires were administered on teacher educators:

One for assessing the present status of using multiple intelligences in classroom
and second for assessing the reflective practices used by teacher educators.

3.6.3.2. Tool Development and Survey Procedure

• Preparation of the First Draft

1
• Suggestions by Experts
2
• Pilot Study
3
• Finalization of the Questionnaires
4
• Execution of the Survey
5
• Data Analysis and Interpretation
6

FIGURE 22: Procedure of the Survey

3.6.3.2.1. Development of the First Draft of the Survey Questionnaires:

Questionnaire to assess use of Multiple Intelligences & lesson Planning: The

first draft of the questionnaire consisted of 45 items. 43 close ended items and 2
open ended questions. The question number 41, 42 & 44 had to be answered in
Yes and No. Other closed ended questions had 3 options Always, Sometimes and
Never. Closed ended items were further grouped as five statement of a particular
intelligence; items related to eight intelligences were included in the
 83

questionnaire. Open ended questions were based on aspects of multiple

intelligences and lesson planning techniques used by teacher educators.
Questionnaire to assess use of Reflective Practices: The first draft of this
questionnaire had 12 items. 9 closed ended questions to be answered as yes or no.
3 Open ended questions asking teacher educators to reflect as teachers and list
reflective practices used by teacher educators.

3.6.3.2.2. Content Validation by Experts:

The draft of the questionnaire was shown to experts and modifications were done
based on the expert’s feedback as shown in Table 4. This led to finalization of the
survey questionnaire. The following expert’s suggestions were used to do the
content validation of the various tools used in the present research:

 Dr. Megha Uplane –Professor, Department of Education and Extension,

Savitribai Phule Pune University, Pune
 Dr. Mrudula Ranade – Professor, Department of Education, S.N.D.T
Women’s University, Pune
 Dr. Neha Deo – Associate Professor, Department of Education, S.N.D.T
University, Pune
 Dr. Padmaja Kasture – Assistant Professor, Adarsha Comprehensive College
of Education, Kothrud, Pune
 Dr. Asawari Bhave – Gudipudi – Dean, MIT School of Social Sciences and
Humanities, MIT Art, Design & Technology University, Pune
 Dr. Archana Chaudhari – Assistant Professor, MIT School of Education &
Research, Kothrud, Pune
 Dr. Poornima Kadam – Associate Professor, MIT School of Education &
Research, Kothrud, Pune
 84

TABLE 4
Modifications suggested by experts regarding the Survey Questionnaire on
Multiple Intelligences & Lesson Planning
Item
Original Form Suggestions Modified Version
No.
I arrange trips to Item is for logical I arrange trips for pre
planetarium, science mathematical service teachers to
museum, musical intelligence so remove planetarium, science
concert, Mathematics musical concert and museums, Mathematical
4
Laboratory) for pre reframe the sentence laboratory so that teacher
service teachers so that making it only for trainees can make logical
they can explore logical – mathematical connections with the
innovative things intelligence abstract concepts.
I ask pre service Add SWOT analysis of I ask teacher trainees to
9 teacher to do SWOT what the pre service do SWOT analysis of
analysis teachers need to do their lessons.
Change the question as
it is not suitable to
I use games involving
I arrange trips to Indian scenario. Add
39 music as ice breakers in
musical concerts some activity pre
my lectures
service teachers can do
readily.
Showing videos is little
I show videos on confusing with visual
I encourage debate on
debates to pre service intelligence, so reframe
40 relevant topics in my
teachers so that they the question or activity
classroom.
develop vocabulary to make it suitable for
verbal intelligence

Are you aware about All questions are in first

I am aware of multiple
multiple intelligences person form; reframe
41 intelligences practices
practices catering to this question to start
catering to classroom.
classroom? with I.

Replace sometimes
Rating Always, Sometimes & with Rarely as Sometime was changed to
Scale Never sometimes can be Rarely
different for all
 85

TABLE 5
Modifications suggested by experts regarding the Survey Questionnaire on
Reflective Practices
Item Modified
Original Form Suggestions
No. Version
SWOT analysis is of some aspect
My SWOT
My SWOT mention the aspect for which the
2 analysis as a
analysis respondents must do SWOT
teacher:
analysis

This item is not needed as item

number 4 has the same answer’ I
I always find Item 5 was
always think about my teaching
5 time to reflect on removed to get
session after it is over’. Like is
my lessons total 11 items
respondents say yes for this answer
for 5 will be also yes.

3.6.3.2.3. Pilot study of the Survey Questionnaire

A pilot study was conducted by administering the questionnaire to 10 teacher

educators teaching in Teacher Education colleges affiliated to Savitribai Phule
Pune University. No major modifications were required and the questionnaires
were finalized.

3.6.3.2.4. Finalization of the Questionnaire

Considering the suggestions and after conducting the pilot study the questionnaire
on assessing present status of classroom practices based on multiple intelligences
for teacher educators and questionnaire on reflective practices was finalized
(APPENDIX A & B). Table 6 & 7 gives the distribution of the final questionnaire
according to the survey objective.
 86

TABLE 6
Objective wise Classification of Survey Questionnaire on Multiple
Intelligences and Lesson Planning

Objective Question Nature of

Objectives
Number Number question
To assess the present status of multiple
1 intelligences used by teacher educators 1 to 40 Close
during their teaching and guidance.
To assess the usage of activities related 1,6,23,26 &
2 Close
to Verbal intelligence. 40
To assess the usage of activities catering 12, 13, 14,
3 Close
to Visual Intelligence. 28 & 31

To assess the usage of activities related 4, 5, 8, 22

4 Close
to Logical – mathematical intelligence. & 36
To assess the usage of activities for
11, 17, 20,
5 catering Bodily – Kinesthetic Closed
22 & 33
Intelligence.
To assess the use of activities related to 2, 9, 10,19
6 Close
Intrapersonal intelligence. & 27
To assess the usage of activities catering 3, 15, 21,
7 Close
to Interpersonal Intelligence. 30 & 35
To assess use of Musical Intelligence
activities while conducting lectures and 10, 18, 34,
8 Close
38 & 39
guidance.
To assess the use of activities related to 7, 24, 25,
9 Close
Naturalistic Intelligence. 29 & 37

To gauge the understanding of Multiple

Intelligences based classroom practices Close-2 &
10 41,42 & 43
Open - 1
and willingness to learn about it.
To assess the use of lesson planning Close - 1
11 44,& 45
methods and awareness about the same. Open - 1
 87

TABLE 7
Objective wise Classification of Survey Questionnaire on Reflective Practices
Nature
Objective Question
Objectives of
Number Number
question
To evaluate teacher educators reflections on Open
1 1&2
qualities as a teacher ended

To explore the reflective practices followed Close

2 3 to 8
by teacher educators. Ended

To find out the opinion of the teacher 2 - Close

educators regarding awareness about ended
9, 10 &
3 1–
reflective practices and willingness to learn 11
Open
about the same ended

3.6.3.2.5. Execution of the Survey

The survey was conducted from Teacher Education Colleges in Pune City
affiliated to Savitribai Phule Pune University. Data was collected from 33 teacher
educators teaching in teacher education colleges. The purpose of the survey was
to assess the existing status in the teacher education colleges regarding the
multiple intelligences theory based classroom practices followed by the teacher
educators and use of reflective practices.

3.6.3.2.6. Data Analysis Strategy:

Percentage was used to analyze the quantitative data obtained from the close
ended items. Statistical Chi square was used to find if the preferences given to
intelligences is by chance or is significant. The Grounded theory approach was
used for qualitative Data Analysis obtained from the survey. The qualitative data
analysis was done as follows:
 First Phase: Open coding – Creating initial categories of the information about
the phenomenon being studied by segmenting information
 88

 Second Phase: Axial coding – selects one open ending categories and
positions it at the center of the process being explored and then related to
other categories.
 Third Phase: Selective coding – a theory is generated from the
interrelationship of the categories in the axial coding model. (Creswell, 2015)

OBJECTIVE 2: To assess and analyze the existing status in the teacher

education colleges regarding the multiple intelligences theory based
classroom practices followed by the pre service teachers.

3.7. Survey Method:

For the present study Cross – sectional survey was used.

The survey method gathers data from a relatively large number of cases at a
particular time. It is not concerned with the characteristics of individuals as
individuals; it is concerned with the statistics that result when data are abstracted
from a number of individual cases. (Best & Kahn, 2005)

3.7.1. Objectives of the Survey:

The survey was conducted on Pre service teachers to:

1. Assess the present status of multiple intelligences used by them during their
lesson planning and implementation of the lessons.
2. Assess the usage of activities catering to Verbal intelligence in their teaching.
3. Assess the usage of activities related to Visual Intelligence.
4. Assess the usage of activities catering to Logical – mathematical intelligence.
5. Assess the usage of activities catering to Bodily – Kinesthetic Intelligence.
6. Assess the use of activities related to Intrapersonal intelligence.
7. Assess the usage of activities related to Interpersonal Intelligence.
8. Assess the use of Musical Intelligence activities while conducting lectures and
guidance.
9. Assess the practice of Naturalistic Intelligence.
 89

10. Gauge the understanding of Multiple Intelligences classroom practices and

willingness to learn about it.
11. Assess the use of lesson planning methods and awareness about the same.
12. Evaluate pre service teacher’s reflections on qualities as a teacher.
13. To explore the reflective practices used by pre service teachers.
14. To find out the opinion of the pre service teachers regarding awareness about
reflective practices and willingness to learn about the same.

3.7.2. Population and Sampling:

A population is any group of individuals who have one or more characteristics in
common that are of interest to the researcher.
A sample is a subgroup of the target population that the researcher plans to study
for generalization about the target population. (Creswell, 2015)

3.7.2.1. Population: All the pre service teachers pursuing Bachelors of Education
Course (B.Ed.) from teacher Education Colleges affiliated to Savitribai
Phule Pune University in Pune City.

3.7.2.2. Sample: For the survey 84 pre service teachers pursuing Bachelors of
Education Course (B.Ed.) from teacher Education Colleges affiliated to
Savitribai Phule Pune University in Pune City were selected. Figure 8
shows the Population and Sample of the Survey.

3.7.2.3. Sample Unit: Pre service teachers pursuing Bachelors of Education

Course (B.Ed.) from teacher Education Colleges affiliated to Savitribai
Phule Pune University in Pune City.
3.7.2.4. Sampling :
Purposive sampling was used for the present study. Purposive sampling may
be defined as selecting units (e.g. individuals, groups of individuals,
institutions) based on specific purposes associated with answering a research
study’s questions (Teddlie & Yu, 2007)
 90

Population: All the

Pre service teachers
pursuing B.Ed.
Course from teacher
Education colleges
affiliated to SPPU

Sample Size: 84 Pre

service teachers
pursuing B.Ed.
Course from teacher
Education colleges
affiliated to SPPU

FIGURE 23: Population and Sample for the Survey

3.7.3. Tools used in the survey:

Questionnaire on use
of multiple
Data Intelligences
Collection
Tools Questionnaire on
Reflective Practices

Percentage & Chi

Square
Tools used for Data Analysis
Survey Tools
Grounded Theory

Tables
Data
Representatio
n Tools
Figures

FIGURE 24: Tools for the Survey

3.7.3.1. Tools for Data Collection

For data collection two questionnaires were administered on Pre service

Teachers: One for assessing the present status of using multiple intelligences in
 91

classroom and second for assessing the reflective practices used by Pre service
teachers.

3.7.3.2. Tool Development and Survey Procedure

• Preparation of the First Draft

1
• Suggestions by Experts
2
• Pilot Study
3
• Finalization of the Questionnaires
4
• Execution of the Survey
5
• Data Analysis and Interpretation
6

FIGURE 25: Procedure of the Survey

3.7.3.2.1. Development of the First Draft of the Survey Questionnaires:

Questionnaire to assess use of Multiple Intelligences & Lesson Planning: The

first draft of the questionnaire consisted of 37 items. 35 close ended items and 2
open ended questions. The question number 33, 34 & 36 had to be answered in
Yes and No. Other closed ended questions had 3 options Always, Sometimes and
Never. Closed ended items were further grouped as four statement of a particular
intelligence; items related to eight intelligences were included in the
questionnaire. Open ended questions were based on aspects of multiple
intelligences and lesson planning techniques used by pre service teachers.

Questionnaire to assess use of Reflective Practices: The first draft of this

questionnaire had 12 items. 9 closed ended questions to be answered as yes or no.
 92

3 Open ended questions asking teacher educators to reflect as teachers and list
reflective practices used by pre service teachers.

3.7.3.2.2. Content Validation by Experts:

The draft of the questionnaire was shown to experts and modifications were done
based on the expert’s feedback as shown in Table 8 & 9. This led to finalization
of the survey questionnaire. Experts were the same as mentioned in section
3.5.3.2.2 of this chapter.
TABLE 8
Modifications suggested by experts regarding the Survey Questionnaire on
Multiple Intelligences & Lesson Planning

Item
Original Statement Suggestions Modified Version
No.
While preparing
I make provision of
lesson plans I sing Reframe the question
singing a song or
7 song or use some starting with I to sound
music to make my
music to make grammatically correct
lesson interesting.
lesson interesting
I do SWOT analysis of
Add SWOT analysis of
I do SWOT analysis myself as a teacher
what and add why to
11 and also ask my and also encourage my
encourage students to
students to use it students to use it to
do SWOT analysis
improve themselves.
Are you aware about
Change in person
multiple I am aware of multiple
reference that is start
41 intelligences intelligences practices
with I as other
practices catering to catering to classroom.
questions.
classroom?
Replace sometimes
Rating Always, Sometimes with Rarely as Sometime was
Scale & Never sometimes can be changed to Rarely
different for all
 93

TABLE 9
Modifications suggested by experts regarding the Survey Questionnaire on
Reflective Practices
Item Original
Suggestions Modified Version
No. Form
SWOT analysis is of some aspect
My SWOT mention the aspect for which the My SWOT analysis
2
analysis respondents must do SWOT as a teacher:
analysis

This item is not needed as item

number 4 has the same answer’ I
I always find
always think about my teaching Item 5 was removed
5 time to reflect
session after it is over’. Like is to get total 11 items
on my lessons
respondents say yes for this
answer for 5 will be also yes.

3.7.3.2.3. Pilot study of the Survey Questionnaire

A pilot study was conducted by administering the questionnaire to 20 Pre service

teachers pursuing Bachelors of Education (B.Ed.) course in Teacher Education
colleges affiliated to Savitribai Phule Pune University. No major modifications
were required and the questionnaires were finalized.

3.7.3.2.4. Finalization of the Questionnaire

Considering the suggestions and after conducting the pilot study the questionnaire
on reflective practices was finalized. Table 10 gives the distribution of the final
questionnaire on multiple intelligences usage and lesson planning according to the
survey objective (APPENDIX C). For Questionnaire to assess usage of reflective
practices the objective wise distribution is given in table 11.
 94

TABLE 10
Objective wise Classification of Survey Questionnaire on Multiple
Intelligences and Lesson Planning
Objective Question Nature of
Objectives
Number Number question
To assess the present status of multiple
intelligences used by pre service
1 1 to 32 Close
teachers during their lesson planning
and implementation of the lessons.
To assess the usage of activities catering 1,6,15 &
2 Close
to Verbal intelligence in their teaching. 16
To assess the usage of activities related 2, 21, 26 &
3 Close
to Visual Intelligence. 28
To assess the usage of activities catering 3, 5, 14 &
4 Close
to Logical – mathematical intelligence. 24

To assess the usage of activities catering 12, 20, 23

5 Closed
to Bodily – Kinesthetic Intelligence. & 25

To assess the use of activities related to 4, 8, 9 &

6 Close
Intrapersonal intelligence. 11
To assess the usage of activities related 13, 17, 22
7 Close
to Interpersonal Intelligence. & 29
To assess the use of Musical Intelligence
7, 10, 19 &
8 activities while conducting lectures and Close
31
guidance.
To assess the practice of Naturalistic 2, 18, 32 &
9 Close
Intelligence. 27
To gauge the understanding of Multiple
33, 34 & Close-2 &
10 Intelligences classroom practices and
35 Open - 1
willingness to learn about it.

To assess the use of lesson planning Close - 1

11 36,& 37
methods and awareness about the same. Open - 1
 95

TABLE 11
Objective wise Classification of Survey Questionnaire on Reflective Practices

Nature
Objective Question
Objectives of
Number Number
question
To evaluate pre service teacher’s
Open
1 reflections on qualities as a teacher. 1&2
ended
To explore the reflective practices used by
Close
2 pre service teachers. 3 to 8
Ended
To find out the opinion of the pre service
2 - Close
teachers regarding awareness about
9, 10 & ended
3 reflective practices and willingness to 11 1 – Open
learn about the same. ended

3.7.3.2.5. Execution of the Survey

The survey was conducted from Teacher Education Colleges in Pune City
affiliated to Savitribai Phule Pune University. Data was collected from 84 Pre
service teachers pursuing Bachelors of Education (B.Ed.) course form teacher
education colleges affiliated to SPPU. The purpose of the survey was to assess the
existing status in the teacher education colleges regarding the multiple
intelligences theory based classroom practices followed by the pre service
teachers and use of reflective practices.

3.7.3.2.6. Data Analysis Strategy:

Percentage was used to analyze the quantitative data obtained from the close
ended items. Statistical Chi square was used to find if the preferences given to
intelligences is by chance or is significant. The Grounded theory approach was
used for qualitative Data Analysis obtained from the survey. The Procedure of
qualitative data analysis is as follows:
 96

 First Phase: Open coding – Creating initial categories of the information about
the phenomenon being studied by segmenting information
 Second Phase: Axial coding – selects one open ending categories and
positions it at the center of the process being explored and then related to
other categories.
 Third Phase: Selective coding – a theory is generated from the
interrelationship of the categories in the axial coding model. (Creswell, 2015)

OBJECTIVE 3: To develop a Multiple Intelligences theory based Teacher

Education model (MARC) using framework of teacher education models to
train pre service teachers in teacher education colleges using multiple
intelligences in their teaching learning practices.

3.8 Product Development

In the present study the product included the development of a Multiple

Intelligences based teacher education model manual for teacher educators.

3.8.1. Steps of Developing the Product: The steps followed in developing the
product in the research is presented in the Table 12.
 97

TABLE 12

Steps followed during the Product Development

Steps Description

Step 1: The
A Multiple Intelligences based Applied, Reflective & Crafts
Product
(MARC) Integrated Teacher Education Model in the form of
developed in the
a Trainer Manual
research

The MARC Model trainer manual was developed to help

teacher educators and pre service teachers:
 Understand concept of multiple intelligences theory
proposed by Dr. Howard Gardner.
 Use multiple intelligences based teaching, learning and
assessment to improve teaching learning practices.
 Conduct needs analysis for identifying dominant and
recessive intelligence.
Step 2:
 Plan lessons based on multiple intelligences theory for
Objectives of the
various subjects.
Product
 Become inclined towards using multiple intelligences
developed
approach to teaching learning.
 Plan group activities catering to eight multiple
intelligences.
 Plan assessments specific to multiple intelligences.
 Comprehend reflective process
 Create awareness about reflective practices.
 Use reflective log to reflect on teaching learning process.
 Introspect with respect to qualities of a teacher.

The MARC model was based on the following principles:

 Differentiation using multiple intelligences.
Step 3: Nature &  Learning by doing.
Planning of the  Learning through Reflection.
Product  Learning by observing.
 Learning through practice.
 Learning through cooperation.
 98

Steps Description

The features of the MARC model were:

 Logical structure as levels, phases and stages.
 SMART objectives for each phase.
 Brief introduction of the MARC model.
 Features of the model detailed in the manual.
 Day wise distribution of session with time details.
 Sessions on Theory of multiple intelligences, 8
intelligences, Need Analysis, Assessments using
multiple intelligences, Reflective practices, Lesson
planning using multiple intelligences & observation of
the lessons.
 Each activity is designed on below matrix:
 Activity name
 Type of activity: Group, Paired or Individual
 Time Required for the activity
 Material required for the activity
 Prerequisite for the activity
Step 4:
 Detailed Process of the activity
Development of
 Supporting resources for each activity mentioned in the
the Product
manual
 Separate handout section for each session
 Handouts for each session attached after the session
 Rating scales, checklist and rubrics attached for activities
that needs to be assessed
 Power point presentation for each session
 Video links given where video is used
 Worksheets for each session to assess understanding of
the session
 Worksheets designed as per the intelligence
 Reflections for every session planned
 Reflections planned as per the intelligence
 Sample lesson plans for 7 school subjects
 Rubrics for lesson plan and lesson observation based on
multiple intelligences
 99

Steps Description
MARC (Multiple Intelligences based Applied Reflective
and Crafts Integrated model) teacher education Model.
MARC model is and integration of features of three teacher
education model that are Applied Science model, Reflective
Step 5: model, Crafts Model and foundation is of multiple
Description of the intelligences theory.
product Model has two levels and each level is divided into phases.
developed The phases are further divided into stages. Model is
designed in such a manner that it will help pre service
teachers acquire knowledge and skills related to use of
multiple intelligences in their classroom. It has detailed
instruction for the trainers from theory to practice.
Step 6: Pre Pilot testing was done on pre service teachers of MIT School
testing of the of Education & Research, Kothrud, Pune. Modifications
product were made as per observations, suggestions given by the pre
developed service teachers and neutral observers.
Step 7:
The MARC model was shown to experts before pilot study
Reliability and
and finalization. Modifications were made as per
validity of the
suggestions given by the experts.
product
Step 8: The suggestions given by the participating pre service
Modification in teachers was that the activities of in the model needed more
the product after time to implement. Accordingly the modifications were
feedback done.
The following were the facets of the product:
 Structure in the form of levels, phases and levels
 Detailed instructions for trainers for each session
 Session arranged in logical sequence from orientation to
practice
 Resources in the form of handouts, power point
Step 9:
presentation, video links, worksheets and reflection
Finalization of
sheets
the product
 Worksheets and reflections as per the intelligence
 Sample lesson plans for 7 school subjects
 Activities described:
Type , Time required, Material requirements, Pre
requisite for the trainer, Procedure, Assessment and
reflections
 100

Steps Description

Details of utility testing:

 The model was given to 5 teacher educators for
implementing in their respective teacher education
colleges on second ear B.Ed. pre service teachers of
batch 2016 – 17.
 Usability questionnaire was given to teacher educators
Step 10: Utility after each intelligence session to score usefulness of the
session
 Usability questionnaire was given to teacher educators
and pre service teachers after completion of the MARC
model for scoring.
 Scores were analyzed and usability of the model
established

 A feedback about the MARC model was taken from the

pre service teachers and teacher educators in the form of
usability questionnaire. Open ended questions were
Step 11: Co – analyzed.
relation of the  Usability scores provided by teacher educators and pre
objectives and service teachers indicated MARC model to be useful for
findings them.
 Qualitative analyses of the responses also indicate that
the model was useful for the teacher educators and pre
service teachers.

Step 12: The MARC model manual was found useful for teaching,
Conclusions learning and assessment using multiple intelligences theory.

The procedure of development of the MARC model developed is represented in

figure 26.
 101

Implementaion
Finalization of the MARC
of the model
Pilot study Product

Suggestions
by experts

Preparation
of the first
draft

FIGURE 26: Procedure of the Product Development

3.8.1.1.First Draft of the Product:

In the present study the product developed was a Multiple Intelligences based
Applied, Reflective, and Crafts (MARC) Teacher Education Model manual
for teacher educators. The content of the product was taken from Multiple
Intelligences theory proposed by Dr. Howard Gardner. The lesson plans were
based on school subjects of Maharashtra State Board. The MARC model
consisted of 19 teaching learning sessions. Apart from these teaching learning
sessions there was demonstration session, guided learning sessions and lesson
development sessions.

 Rationale for selecting the topic: After analysis of survey data it was
observed that teacher educators and pre service teachers though are aware
of multiple intelligences rarely use it their teaching learning practice. They
also expressed the need to know more about multiple intelligences based
classroom practices.
 102

3.8.1.2. Content Validation by Experts:

A feedback sheet comprising of 20 close ended items and 2 open ended items was
developed to get the expert’s opinion about the MARC Model. The following
expert’s suggestions were used to do the content validation of the MARC Model
developed in the present research:
 Dr. Padmaja Kasture – Assistant Professor, Adarsha Comprehensive College
of Education, Kothrud, Pune
 Dr. Asawari Bhave – Gudipudi – Principal, MIT VGTTA B.Ed College, Loni
Kalbhor
 Dr. Archana Chaudhari – Assistant Professor, MIT School of Education &
Research, Kothrud, Pune
 Dr. Gargee Mitra – Principal, MIT School of Education & Research,
Kothrud, Pune
 Dr. Sunanda Roy – Assistant Professor, Adarsha Comprehensive College of
Education, Pune
The classification of items and their nature according to the objectives has been
presented in Table 13.
TABLE 13

Objective wise Classification of the Feedback for the Experts

Sr. Nature of
Objectives Item No.
No. Question

1 To assess the planning of the MARC model 1,2,3 & 4 Close Ended

To evaluate the pre-planning stage of the

2 5 to 13 Close Ended
MARC Model
To appraise the Planning stage of the MARC
3 14 & 15 Close Ended
Model
To assess the overall impact of MARC model in
4 developing multiple intelligences based 16 to 20 Close Ended
classroom practices.
To appraise the striking features of the MARC
5 21 Open ended
Model
6 To Suggest modifications for the MARC Model 22 Open ended
 103

The product consisting of the sessions, resources, lesson plans was shown to the
experts. Table 14 gives the analysis of the responses given by the experts
regarding the MARC Model.
TABLE 14

Responses given by Experts regarding the MARC Model

Sr.No. Item SA A D SD
The objective of the MARC model are
1 3 2 - -
achievable

2 The structure of MARC model is coherent. 4 1 - -

3 The content of MARC model is clear and precise 3 2 - -

Instructions provided for conducting the MARC

4 5 - - -
Model are appropriate and easy to follow
The information provided about multiple
5 4 1 - -
intelligences is appropriate and sufficient
The activities planned for each intelligence is
6 3 2 - -
linked with the particular intelligence
The assessments planned appropriate with
7 5 - - -
respect to the sessions
Handouts of MARC model enriched with
8 3 2 - -
information
Power point presentations are attractive and with
9 3 2 - -
appropriate content
The lesson plan format is interesting and
10 4 1 - -
appropriate

11 The sample lesson plans are easy to follow 3 2 - -

Strategies of reflection used are easy to

12 3 2 - -
understand and follow
13 The activities in MARC model creative 5 - -
Pre service teachers will be able to plan and
14 design activities catering to multiple intelligences 5 - - -
using MARC model
 104

Sr.No. Item SA A D SD
MARC model will be useful in helping pre
15 service teachers develop multiple intelligences 5 - -
based lesson plans
MARC model will be useful in developing
16 3 2 - -
reflective practices
MARC model will be useful for general
17 4 1 - -
classrooms instructions
MARC model will enhance quality of teaching
18 5 - - -
learning process
MARC model enriches the teacher educators and
19 pre service teachers with many new concepts and 5 - - -
strategies

20 MARC model can be implemented easily 3 2 - -

From Table 14 it is clear that all the responses have been given under the columns
of strongly agree (SA) and agree (A). 100 % response was given for 7 statements
out of 20 statements. Out of the 5 experts, 3 and sometimes 4 experts gave all
their responses in strongly agree column. The experts had a positive opinion about
the multiple intelligences based Applied, Reflective and Crafts Integrated model
developed by the researcher.

The open ended question regarding striking features of MARC Model was
analyzed using Grounded Theory Approach. The qualitative analysis has been
presented in the form of figures as follows according to the items given in the
questionnaire:
 105

3.8.1.2.1. Striking Feature of MARC Model as per Experts (Item No. 21)

 Included Theoretical  Helps in developing  Reflective practices

background of teaching – learning are innovative
Multiple Intelligences practice  Will be helpful in
and Intelligence  Practice sessions will developing self
theories provide reinforcement evaluation among pre
 Handouts on  Structure is service teachers
attributes and systematic  Method of reflection
activities was  It is logical as per intelligence
appropriate  Pre service teachers
 Helpful in developing will come to know
multiple intelligences need of reflection
based practices
 Activities are as per Features of
the intelligence Applied Model

Features of
Reflective Model
 Sample lesson plans
Features of
are good and for all
Multiple subjects
Intelligences  Activities help pre
service teachers to get
knowledge about MI
 Resources are
complete and
systematic
 Demonstration Features of
planned Crafts Model
 Worksheets check
understanding of MI
 Lesson planning by
pre service teachers
planned

FIGURE 27: Responses given by Experts regarding Striking Features of the

Model
 106

Responses given by experts regarding striking features of MARC Model was

divided into 4 groups through open coding as shown in the figure 27. The Codes
were ‘Features of Multiple Intelligences Theory’, ‘Features of Applied Model’,
‘Features of Reflective model’ and ‘Features of Crafts Model’. Using Axial
coding the theme that aroused is that ‘The experts found MARC Model having
features of multiple intelligences theory, reflective, applied and crafts teacher
education models’

3.8.1.2.2. Suggestions for modifications of MARC Model given by Experts

Only few suggestions were received and most of them repeated. Figure 28 shows
the qualitative analysis of the responses:

 Time of few sessions

 Images can be more
could be increased
clear…as on enlarging
 Activity session needs
its gets blurred
more time
 Pictures of
 Few shorter sessions
Psychologist to be
can be merged for
added on the handouts
convenience

Suggestions Suggestions
related to related to
resources Structure

FIGURE 28: Suggestions given by Experts for improving the model

Suggestion for modifications in MARC Model given by experts was divided into
2 groups through open coding as shown in the figure 28. The Codes were
‘Suggestions related to resources’ & ‘Suggestions related to the structure’. Using
 107

Axial coding the theme obtained was that ‘A few modifications need to be in the
MARC Model with respect to resources and structure’.
Axial coding or themes were then converted into a theory using the selective
coding. This was the finals step in the grounded theory for analyzing the
qualitative data obtained from the teacher educators through their responses given
in the questionnaire. Figure 29 shows the process and the final theory reached by
the researcher using grounded theory.

21. The experts found MARC Model having striking features of multiple
intelligences theory, reflective, applied and crafts teacher education
models

22. A few modifications need to be in the MARC Model with respect to

resources and structure

22
21

The experts found MARC Model having striking features of multiple

intelligences theory, Applied, Reflective and crafts teacher education
model with few modifications.

FIGURE 29: ‘Axial Coding’ and ‘Selective Coding’ of the qualitative data

After analyzing the responses using the ‘axial coding’ the data was put into
‘themes’. Figure 29 shows the ‘themes’ generated and the ‘final theory’ reached
by the researcher using the ‘selective coding’ phase in Grounded theory. The final
theory indicates the experts found MARC Model with striking features of
multiple intelligences theory, Applied, Reflective and Crafts teacher education
model with few modifications. Modifications were related to the resources and
minor improvement in the structure.
 108

The outline of the MARC model was finalized after consultation with experts. No
major modifications were suggested. (APPENDIX D)

3.8.1.3.Pilot Study of the Model: The pilot study using a part of the model was
conducted during the academic year 2014 – 15. A feedback was taken
from the pre service teachers. No major changes were supposed to be
done. The pre service teachers suggested that time could have been more
for few activities were enactment needs to be done.

Accordingly modification in time was done for the activities in the MARC Model.
The researcher informed the pre service teachers to come prepared with material
and script for activities which require more time like role play, poster
presentations it helped in saving time. Thus, the usability of the MARC Model
was carried out by making modifications as per the expert’s suggestions and the
experience of the researcher during the pilot study.

3.8.1.4.Finalization of the MARC Model: After taking the responses from the
experts and conducting pilot study the MARC Model in the form of a
manual was finalized.

3.8.2. Description of the Product: The Product developed in the present

research was a Multiple intelligences based applied science, reflective,
crafts integrated model. For using the model a manual was developed for
teacher educators.

3.8.2.1.Features of MARC model in the content definition of the term model:

MARC model developed in the research is a model, since it has the
following features of a model as listed by Maker (1982) (as cited in
Department of Education, The Government of Western Australia, n.d.).
Table 15 given below shows the features of MARC model with respect to
common features of a model.
 109

Table 15
Features of MARC Model with respect to definition of Model

Sr. Features common to

Features of the MARC Model
No. all Model

 Multiple Intelligences theory proposed by

Dr. Howard Gardner in 1983 and its
integration with three teacher education
An indentified purpose models i.e., applied science model,
1
or area of concentration. Reflective model and Crafts model.
 Aim is to train pre service teacher in using
multiple intelligences approach to teaching,
learning and assessment.

 MARC Model is divided into sessions

catering to 8 multiple intelligences; need
Guidelines for analysis, reflective practices, assessments
developing specific day using multiple intelligences and lesson
2
to day learning planning using multiple intelligences.
experiences  All the sessions have detailed instructions
for teachers regarding conduction of the
session and every activity.

 The MARC model has a systematic

structure with broad levels like knowledge
acquisition and skill acquisition. The levels
are further divided into phases and phases
into stages. Each stage has sessions
Definite patterns and planned with the help of various activities
3 requirements for these like discussions, games and so on.
learning activities.  Details regarding the nature of the activity,
preparations needed and material required
is specified for each activity in the model.
 Resources like handouts, worksheets,
power point presentation and reflection
sheets are provided in the model.
 110

Sr. Features common to

Features of the MARC Model
No. all Model
 Researches done by Dr. Howard Gardner
and other psychologist in the field on
A body of research
multiple intelligences have been listed in
surrounding their
the model along with a session on
4 development or an
evolution of the model.
evaluation of their
 International and National researches had
effectiveness.
been reviewed and listed in the thesis used
for development of the model.

3.8.2.2.Components of the MARC Model: Product developed in the research is

a teacher educators manual based in MARC Model. Figure 30 below
shows the key components of the manual.

Theoretical Systematic
Lesson Plan on Background Structure
seven school
subjects

Instructions for
teacher
MARC educators
Resources
Model

Activities for
multiple
Assessments Intelligences
Reflective related to
Practices Multiple
Intelligences

FIGURE 30: Components of the Product developed

 111

3.8.2.3. Features of Integrated MARC Model: MARC model is an integration

of three teacher education models and multiple intelligences theory. Name
of the model that is MARC stands for Multiple Intelligences based
Applied, Reflective & Crafts integrated teacher education model. Figure
31 given below shows the features of MARC integrated Model.

Multiple
Intelligences
Theory

MARC Applied
Crafts
Integrated Science
Model
Model Model

Reflective
Model

FIGURE 31: MARC Integrated Model

MARC model is based on the framework and principles of teacher education
model. Table 16 below shows the features of MARC model with respect to use of
multiple intelligences theory and teacher education models.
Table 16: Features of MARC Integrated Model
Sr. Theory and
Features of MARC model
No. models
 The base of the MARC model is the multiple
intelligences theory proposed by Dr, Howard
Gardner.
 The activities are planned for 8 multiple
intelligences namely: Verbal, Visual, Logical –
Multiple
Mathematical, Interpersonal, Intrapersonal,
1 Intelligences
Bodily – Kinesthetic, Musical and Naturalistic
Theory
intelligence.
 Model provides education for teaching, learning
and assessments using multiple intelligences
theory.

Sr. Theory and Features of MARC model

 112

No. models
 As per applied science model teaching is a
Science and pre service teachers must be taught
theories provided with strong research evidence.
After they are aware of the theory it is used in
practice.
The Applied  First session on MARC Model is based on
2 Science Teacher intelligences theories and multiple intelligences
Education Model theory so that pre service teachers get knowledge
about the theories and evolution of multiple
intelligences theory.
 Whole MARC model is based on use of multiple
intelligences theory to improve teaching learning
practices.
 This model aims at assessing and developing
reflective practices amongst pre service teachers.
Every session of MARC Model ends with a
reflection using different methods so as to help
The Reflective pre service teachers develop the habit of
3 Teacher Education reflection.
Model  Lesson plan on multiple intelligences consists of
reflection as a stage of planning. Wherein the pre
service teachers plan methods for getting
feedback fro the students so as to reflect on their
performance.
 According to this model pre service teachers learn
working closely with the experienced teacher.
 All the sessions of MARC Model are conducted
by teacher educators and pre service teachers plan
The Crafts Teacher activities and develop lesson using guidance of
4
Education Model the teacher educators.
 This model also mentions need of demonstrations
for learning a skill. Each session of MARC model
has a demonstration followed by pres service
teachers planning their lessons and its execution.

MARC model focuses on eight multiple intelligences proposed by Dr. Howard

Gardner which is depicted in the figure 32 below:
 113

Verbal
Intelligence
Naturalistic Visual
Intelligence Intelligence

Musical Multiple Logical -

Intelligence mathematical
Intelligences
Intelligence

Interpersonal Bodily -
Intelligence Kinesthetic
Intelligence
Intrapersonal
Intelligence

FIGURE 32: Multiple intelligences catered in the MARC Model

3.8.2.4.Structure of the MARC Model: MARC Model has been designed as a

model with a systematic graded structure in the form of Levels, Phases,
Stages and Activities. Each level and phase has defined measurable
objectives. Figure 33 shows the structure of the MARC Model:

Orientation
Phase

Level 1:
Functional
Knowledge
Phase
Acquisition

Reflective
MARC Model Phase
Syntax
Orientation &
Presentation
Level 2: Skill Phase
Acquisition
Guided
Practice Phase

FIGURE 33: Structure of MARC Model

 114

Above figure shows the two levels of the MARC model:

 Level 1: Knowledge Acquisition level deals with providing knowledge and
understanding regarding the theories, activities, attributes related to multiple
intelligences and reflective practices. This level is further classified into
phases which are as follows:
 Orientation Phase: This phase provides orientation session on eight
multiple intelligence and assessments based on multiple intelligences.
 Functional Phase: This phase involves practical implications like
need analysis.
 Reflective Phase: This Phase has been planned to equip pre service
teachers with knowledge and understanding of reflective practices in
education.

 Level 2: Skill Acquisition level helps pre service teachers to use the
theoretical knowledge gained in level 1 to develop lesson plans. Level 2 is
further classified into 2 phases:
 Orientation and presentation phase: Provides orientation about the
lesson planning and execution.
 Guided practice phase: In this phase the pre service teacher
implement their lesson plan on peer group under the guidance of the
teacher educator.(Which will enable them to then take it to the actual
classrooms)

3.8.2.5. Elements of MARC Model: The MARC model has all the elements of a
model of teaching as given by Bruce Joyce and Marsha Weil in their book
Models of teaching which are shown in the figure 34 given below:
 115

Principles of Reaction: Provides details of

teacher's roles and responsibilities in executing
the model.

Support System: Resources used for smooth

execution of the model.

Social System: The classroom environment

needed for implementing the model.

Instructional Effects: Main outcomes of the

model.

Nurturant Effects: Secondary outcomes of the

model.

FIGURE 34: Essential elements of MARC Model

3.8.2.6. Details about the format of the model: MARC model as discussed has a
systematic structure, but apart from that in order for teacher educators to
execute the model smoothly and systematically it has pre defined
instructions, activities and format which is discussed in the following
points:

 Format for instructions: MARC model has few instructions for the teacher
educators at the start of the model. Each session has process wherein detailed
instructions for execution of the session are provided.

 Format for Sessions: In MARC Model there are sessions planned on eight
multiple intelligences which are organized in a set format for maintain logical
flow of the sessions. The format is shown in the figure 35 below:
 116

Introduction of the intelligence

Activity 1 & 2 catering to the

intelligence

Discussion on activities for the

intelligence

Assessment of the learning

Reflection on the session

FIGURE 35: Format of the multiple intelligence session

The following table 17 gives a sample intelligence session on verbal intelligence

using the steps shown in figure 35.
Table 17
Sample Verbal Intelligence Session (Refer Page no. 35 of MARC Model
Manual – Appendix D)
Sr.
Format Example
No.
Introduction of A teacher led discussion using a power point
1 the intelligence presentation on verbal intelligence and handouts on
attributes of verbally intelligence person is planned for
session introducing the intelligence to pre service teachers.
Activity 1: Who am I?
Activities 1 & 2 Activity 2: Advertisement…..Advertisement
2 catering to Two activities planned are general and focus on
catering to children with verbal intelligence and gives
intelligence pre service teachers idea about planning similar
activities.
Discussion on
Teacher conducts a whole class discussion on the
3 activities of the activities catering to verbal intelligence. A handout on
intelligence activities for verbal intelligence is discussed.
 117

Sr.
Format Example
No.
Assessments were planned keeping in mind the
attributes of the people with a particular multiple
Assessment for intelligence.
4
learning As verbally intelligence individuals like to read so, a
worksheet on verbal intelligence is used for assessing
understanding about verbal intelligence.
A tool used for reflection on each multiple intelligence
session caters to the particular intelligence profile.
Verbal intelligence session has a reflection sheet
Reflection on the consisting of following questions:
5
session  What I liked in this session on verbal
intelligence?
 What I least liked in this session?
 Suggestions for the teacher.

 Format for the activities: As shown in the figure 35 above the session on
eight intelligences include activities for orienting the pre service teachers.
Each activity is designed using few steps so as to make it meaningful and easy
for execution. The steps are depicted in the figure 36 shown below:

Name Nature Pre

Time Material requisite
of the of the Process
activity Activity Required Required for the
activity

FIGURE 36: Steps for activities in MARC Model

 118

The following table 18 gives a sample activity for session on verbal intelligence
using the steps shown in figure 36:
Table 18
Sample Activity Session (Refer Page No. 36 of MARC Model Manual –
Appendix D)
Sr.
Steps Example
No.
1 Name of the activity Who am I?
2 Nature of the
Paired
activity
3 Approx time
15 min
required
4 Material required Statements written on a slip
Teacher has to keep statements on slips of paper
5 Pre requisite for the
ready before conducting the activity. Number of slips
activity
depends upon the number of participants.
1. Teacher asks the participants to form a straight
line by standing according to their heights.
2. Teacher pairs the participants as they stand in the
line. All the participants take seats with their
partner.
3. Teacher puts all the slips prepared in a bag and
asks the pairs to choose one slip.
4. Teacher asks participants in pair to discuss and
write an autobiography of the thing on the slip
they have received. Teacher instructs the
participants that the autobiography must have
following features:
6 Process  Creative
 Imaginative
 Rich vocabulary
 Proper start and an end
 Describe feelings of the thing with the
help of events or incidences.
 Should be in 100 to 150 words
5. After participants have finished with the
autobiography teacher asks few pairs to read it
for the whole class.
6. Teacher will collect all the autobiographies for
later reading.
 119

 Format for the assessments: Assessments related to multiple intelligences

has two perspective:

 Assessment within the session: As shown in figure 35 every session planned

in MARC model ends with assessing the pre service teacher learning.
Methods for assessment used for intelligence sessions cater to the intelligence;
this was planned so that pre service teachers become aware that assessments
can also be done catering to multiple intelligences. For example:
o Flowchart used for Logical Mathematical Intelligence
o Worksheet used for Verbal Intelligence
o Mind Maps used for Visual Intelligence
o Essay used for Intrapersonal Intelligence

 Assessment in classroom using multiple intelligences: A complete session

has been planned on assessments using multiple intelligences in a format
similar for intelligence sessions.

 Format for Reflective Practices: One aim of MARC model is to develop

reflective practitioners. In order to develop reflection an habit two modes are
used namely:

 Reflections after each session: After every session teacher educators and pre
service teachers are required to reflect on the session and amount of learning
taken place. Refection tools chosen are catering to the attributes of the
intelligence explored. For example:
o Written reflection – Verbal Intelligence
o Tree diagram – Bodily Kinesthetic Intelligence
o Smiley faces – Interpersonal Intelligence
o Seed to tree – Naturalistic Intelligence
 120

 Reflection session: As found in the survey pre service teachers were

unaware of the reflective practices, so in order to help them know theory of
reflective practices and tools used this session was planned. The session deals
with information about theories of reflection, reflective cycles, reflective log
and reflective tools.

3.8.2.7. Aspects of Lesson Planning using Multiple Intelligences: Lesson plans

based on multiple intelligences for seven school subjects were developed
having the following format as depicted in the table 19 below:

Table 19

Aspects of the Lesson Plan

Aspects Items Included Rationale

 Name of the board

targeted; lessons in  This aspect gives brief
MARC model are catering information about the target
to Maharashtra Board group
 Grade for which the lesson  it gives a broad
Initial
is designed understanding about the time
Information
 Subject is mentioned in needed for the activities and
the lesson plan along with helps in planning
main topic and sub topic  Every subtopic will have a
 Time required for the different set of activities.
lesson is mentioned

 Some lesson requires

students to make poster,
 The details of the props for role play etc and
Material
resources and material details are mentioned here.
Required
used is mentioned  Evaluation is an integral part
of the lesson so evaluation
tools are needed.
 121

Aspects Items Included Rationale

 The general objective and
the specific objective of
the lesson.
 Without objectives no
 The general objective is a
teaching learning can take
broad aim of the lesson.
place.
 The specific objectives are
 Gives insight to the pre
given according to the
service teachers about
Objectives expected outcome o f the
planning the lessons and
lesson. These are
writing objectives.
measurable objectives.
 Based on objectives
 Cognitive and
activities are decided.
psychomotor domains are
considered while writing
these objectives.

Step by step
Procedure:  Helps in understanding the
Lesson  Teaching – learning process of multiple
consists of activities intelligences based lessons
following and role of student and
steps: teacher.

 These activities are based on

the previous knowledge of
the students. Depending
upon the experience teacher
decides to go ahead with new
topic or spend time on the
current one.
Hook  Introductory activity  These activities are designed
keeping in mind the
dominant intelligence of the
class initially and later any
intelligence can be catered
depending upon the demand
of the lesson.
 122

Aspects Items Included Rationale

 Students are divided into
groups depending upon their
dominant intelligence and
each intelligence group is
given an activity.
 Details of the activities
 Outcome of all the activities
planned for the session are
Input will be same that is the
given with teacher and
learning objectives of the
student role
lesson.
 Here pre service teachers
understand the role of
differentiation that activities
are different but outcome is
same.
 Every activity has different
role for students to do.
 Pre service teachers
understand as and when
 Students role in the learning is happening by
activity is described and specifying the role of
Interaction the means by which student.
students will interact with  In role play students will
the content design an act, write
dialogues and enact keeping
in mind the criteria of
assessment.
 Provided ownership of
learning to students.
 Activities have different
products like role play,
poster, power point, essay,
debates reports etc.
Product or  Outcome of the activities
 Pre service teachers realize
Performance planned in input
the need of varied
assessment for the same
content in order to facilitate
inclusive classroom.
 123

Aspects Items Included Rationale

 Tools for assessing the
products in a lesson were
detailed.
 Like for role play a rubric
 Tools and criteria for with particular criteria was
Assessment
assessing the products mentioned.
 Pre service teacher gained
awareness that content can
be assessed using tools like
rubric, rating scale also in
spite of just question papers.
 The practices used by teacher
to know about students
learning and their teaching
are mentioned here.
 Reflection practices used  Time is given to students for
Reflection
is mentioned reflecting on the lesson
 Also develops reflective
attitude amongst pre service
teachers and need to be a
reflective teacher.
 124

3.8.2.8.Framework of the MARC Model: The frame work of the MARC model is shown in table 20 below:

Table 20: Framework of MARC Model

Stages of Approx
Sr.No. Activities Planned Resources Planned
MARC Model Time
Level 1 – Knowledge Acquisition: Orientation Phase
 Reflecting on Video  Instruction for teachers for implementing 3
Stage 1.1:  Jigsaw (Using handouts on intelligence activities
Demystifying theories)  Video link
1 Multiple  Teacher led discussion with power point  Power point presentation 2 hours
Intelligences presentation  Handouts on Intelligence theories
Theory  Written reflection  Worksheet on intelligence
 Reflection sheet
 Teacher led discussion on verbal  Instruction for teachers for implementing 6
intelligence using power point activities (2 sample activity catering to the
presentation and handout intelligence)
Stage 1.2:  Activity: Who am I?  Power point presentation
Comprehending  Activity: Advertisement...Advertisement  Handouts on attributes of people
2
Verbal  Teacher led discussion on activities using  Handout on activities for the intelligence 2 hours
Intelligence handout  Resources needed for implementing the 2
 Assessment: Worksheet activities
 Reflection: Written  Worksheet on Verbal Intelligence
 Reflection sheet on Verbal Intelligence
 125

Stages of Approx
Sr.No. Activities Planned Resources Planned
MARC Model Time
 Teacher led discussion on visual  Instruction for teachers for implementing 6
intelligence using power point activities (2 sample activity catering to the
presentation and handout intelligence)
Stage 1.3:  Activity: Picture Stories  Power point presentation
Comprehending  Activity: Treasure hunt  Handouts on attributes of people
3
Visual  Teacher led discussion on activities using  Handout on activities for the intelligence 2 hours
Intelligence handout  Resources needed for implementing the 2
 Assessment: Mind Map activities
 Reflection: Muddiest Point  Worksheet on Visual Intelligence

 Teacher led discussion on Bodily  Instruction for teachers for implementing 6

Kinesthetic intelligence using power point activities (2 sample activity catering to the
presentation and handout intelligence)
 Activity: Budding Actors  Power point presentation
Stage 1.4:
 Activity: Machine Game  Handouts on attributes of people
Comprehending
 Teacher led discussion on activities using  Handout on activities for the intelligence
4 Bodily
handout  Resources needed for implementing the 2 2 ½ hours
Kinesthetic
 Assessment: Worksheet activities
Intelligence
 Reflection: Tree diagram  Worksheet on Bodily – Kinesthetic
Intelligence
 Reflection using tree diagram sheet
 126

Stages of Approx
Sr.No. Activities Planned Resources Planned
MARC Model Time
 Teacher led discussion on Musical  Instruction for teachers for implementing 6
intelligence using power point activities (2 sample activity catering to the
presentation and handout intelligence)
 Activity: Musical Concert  Power point presentation
Stage 1.5:  Activity: Let’s Play some music  Handouts on attributes of people
Comprehending  Teacher led discussion on activities using  Handout on activities for the intelligence
5
Musical handout  Resources needed for implementing the 2 2 ½ hours
Intelligence  Assessment: Poem on musical intelligence activities
 Reflection: Sticky notes  Rubric for evaluating poem on musical
intelligence
 Reflection – sticky notes

 Teacher led discussion on Interpersonal  Instruction for teachers for implementing 6

intelligence using power point activities (2 sample activity catering to the
presentation and handout intelligence)
Stage 1.6:  Activity: Mirror Game  Power point presentation
Comprehending  Activity: Fish Bowl  Handouts on attributes of people
6
Interpersonal  Teacher led discussion on activities using  Handout on activities for the intelligence 2 hours
Intelligence handout  Resources needed for implementing the 2
 Assessment: Ask a Question activities
 Reflection: Smiley Faces  Reflection sheet on Interpersonal
Intelligence
 127

Stages of Approx
Sr.No. Activities Planned Resources Planned
MARC Model Time
 Teacher led discussion on Logical -  Instruction for teachers for implementing 6
Mathematical intelligence using power activities (2 sample activity catering to the
point presentation and handout intelligence)
Stage 1.7:
 Activity: Guess the Future?  Power point presentation
Comprehending
 Activity: Number Game  Handouts on attributes of people
7 Logical -
 Teacher led discussion on activities using  Handout on activities for the intelligence 2 hours
Mathematical
handout  Resources needed for implementing the 2
Intelligence
 Assessment: Flow Chart activities
 Reflection: Thumbs up, Down & Center  Worksheet on Logical – Mathematical
Intelligence
 Teacher led discussion on Intrapersonal  Instruction for teachers for implementing 6
intelligence using power point activities (2 sample activity catering to the
presentation and handout intelligence)
 Activity: Magazine stories  Power point presentation
Stage 1.8:  Activity: It’s all about me  Handouts on attributes of people
Comprehending  Teacher led discussion on activities using  Handout on activities for the intelligence
8
Intrapersonal handout  Resources needed for implementing the 2 2 hours
Intelligence  Assessment: Essay activities
 Reflection: Written  Worksheet on Intrapersonal Intelligence
 Reflection sheet on Intrapersonal
Intelligence
 128

Stages of Approx
Sr.No. Activities Planned Resources Planned
MARC Model Time
 Teacher led discussion on Naturalistic  Instruction for teachers for implementing 6
intelligence using power point activities (2 sample activity catering to the
presentation and handout intelligence)
 Activity: Crack the code  Power point presentation
Stage 1.9:
 Activity: Natural Orchestra  Handouts on attributes of people
Comprehending
9  Teacher led discussion on activities using  Handout on activities for the intelligence
Naturalistic 2 hours
handout  Resources needed for implementing the 2
Intelligence
 Assessment: Worksheet activities
 Reflection: Seed to tree  Worksheet on Naturalistic Intelligence
 Reflection sheet- seed to tree on Naturalistic
Intelligence
 Teacher led discussion with help of power
Stage 1.10:
point presentation
Assessment
 Concept map
10 using multiple  Instruction for teachers for implementing 5
 Power point with Handout
intelligences activities
theory  Reflection: Written
 Power point presentation
2 hours
 Worksheet on Multiple Intelligences Theory
Stage 1.11:
 Reflection sheet for the session
Testing  Worksheet on multiple intelligences
11
Attainment of
MI theory
 129

Stages of Approx
Sr.No. Activities Planned Resources Planned
MARC Model Time
Stage 1.12:
12 Reflecting on  Rating scale on the orientation session 15 min
the session
Level 1 – Knowledge Acquisition: Functional Phase
 Instruction for teachers for implementing 3
 Reflecting on a video
activities
Stage 2.1: Need  Teacher led discussion using power point 1 ½ hour
13  Video Link
Analysis presentation
 Power point presentation
 Identifying individual and group profile
 Multiple Intelligences Inventory
Stage 2.2:  Instruction for teachers for implementing 2
Applying  Planning activities catering to multiple activities 1 hour 15
14 multiple intelligences  Rating scale for multiple intelligence min
intelligences  Reflection: Stand – Crouch – Sit activity
theory
Level 1 – Knowledge Acquisition: Reflective Phase
 Reflecting on a video  Instruction for teachers for implementing 5
Stage 3.1:  Teacher led discussion using power point activities
15 Reflective presentation  Video link
Practices  Acquainting with techniques of reflection  Power point presentation
using handout  Handouts on models of reflective cycles 3 hours
 Discussion using reflective log  Handout on strategies for reflections
Stage 3.2:  Assessing reflective practitioner: Article  Teacher reflective log
16  Feedback sheet for session observation on
Reflective Log writing
 Reflection: Rating scale multiple intelligences
 130

Stages of Approx
Sr.No. Activities Planned Resources Planned
MARC Model Time

Level 2 – Skill Acquisition: Orientation Phase

1 ½ hours
Stage 1.1:
Developing  Reflecting on a video
17
multiple  Whole class discussion using power point  Instruction for teachers for implementing 3
intelligences presentation activities
based lesson  Reflection: Written  Video link
plan  Power point presentation
 Handouts on models of reflective cycles
 Multiple Intelligences based lesson plan
evaluation rubric
 Rubric for observation of lesson plans based
on Multiple Intelligences
Stage 1.2:  Lesson plan format on multiple
Demonstration  Discussion on lesson observation rubric intelligences
18 of the lesson  Demonstration of multiple intelligences  Sample lesson plans for Science,
plan based on lesson Mathematics, English, History, Geography,
MI theory
Economics and Environmental Science
 Reflection sheet on the session
 131

Stages of Approx
Sr.No. Activities Planned Resources Planned
MARC Model Time

Level 2 – Skill Acquisition: Guided Practice Phase

Stage 2.1:
Developing
Pace of
lesson plans
 Developing lesson plans under the Instructions for teachers for implementing the pre
19 based on
guidance of the teacher session service
multiple
teachers
intelligences
theory

Stage 2.2:
Pace of
Implementing
 Conducting lessons based on multiple Lesson plans and learning resources developed pre
20 lessons based
intelligences on peer group by the pre service teachers service
on multiple
teachers
intelligences

 Teacher in the above table refers to Teacher educators

 132

3.8.2.9. Overview of MARC Model

Figure 37 below shows components of MARC model at a glance.

Figure 37: Overview of MARC Model

 133

3.8.2.10. Layout of the Manual: The MARC model was written in the form of a
manual for teacher educator, layout of which is shown in the table 21 below:
TABLE 21
Contents in the MARC Model Manual

Sr.
Contents
No.
1 Preface

2 Details of phases of MARC model

Introduction of MARC model: Concept of Multiple Intelligences,

3
Applied Science, Reflective & Crafts Teacher Education Model
4 Objectives of Each level

5 Stage 1.1: Demystifying Multiple Intelligences Theory

6 Stage 1.2: Comprehending Verbal Intelligence

7 Stage 1.3: Comprehending Visual Intelligence

8 Stage 1.4: Comprehending Bodily Kinesthetic Intelligence

9 Stage 1.5: Comprehending Musical Intelligence

10 Stage 1.6: Comprehending Interpersonal Intelligence

11 Stage 1.7: Comprehending Logical - Mathematical Intelligence

12 Stage 1.8: Comprehending Intrapersonal Intelligence

13 Stage 1.9: Comprehending Naturalistic Intelligence

14 Stage 1.10: Assessment using multiple intelligences theory

15 Stage 1.11: Testing Attainment of MI theory

16 Stage 1.12: Reflecting on the session

17 Stage 2.1: Need Analysis

18 Stage 2.2: Applying multiple intelligences theory

19 Stage 3.1: Reflective Practices

20 Stage 3.2: Reflective Log

21 Social System: Level 1: Knowledge Acquisition

22 Principles of reaction: Level 1: Knowledge Acquisition

 134

Sr.
Contents
No.
23 Support system: Level 1: Knowledge Acquisition

24 Instructional & Nurturant Effects: Level 1: Knowledge Acquisition

25 Stage 1.1: Developing multiple intelligences based lesson plan

26 Stage 1.2: Demonstration of the lesson plan based on MI theory

Stage 2.1: Developing lesson plans based on multiple intelligences
27
theory
28 Stage 2.2: Implementing lessons based on multiple intelligences

29 Social System: Level 2: Skill Acquisition

30 Principles of reaction: Level 2: Skill Acquisition

31 Support system : Level 2: Skill Acquisition

32 Instructional & Nurturant Effects : Level 2: Skill Acquisition

33 Bibliography

There is a Handout section after every stage mentioned in table 21 above.

Handout section comprises of all the resources like power point presentations,
handouts, worksheets, reflection sheets and material for conducting the activity.

OBJECTIVE 4: To establish Usability of the developed MARC Model

3.9. Survey for usability testing was done to establish usability of the MARC
Model. Usability shows how easy and pleasant features of MARC Model
are to use. It is a quality attribute that assesses how easy model is to use.

Usability is defined by 5 quality Criteria:

 Understandability: How easy are the content, instruction, structure,
language and activities to understand by the user?
 Learnability: How easy is it for users to accomplish basic tasks the first
time they encounter the model? It also represents the extent to which it is
easy to learn from the model.
 135

 Efficiency: Once users have learned the activities in the model, how
quickly can they perform tasks and with ease?
 Memorability: When users return want to use the activities of the model
after a period of not using it, how easily can they reestablish proficiency?
 Satisfaction: How pleasant is it to use the model? And if it is able to
achieve instructional and nurturant effects of the model.

3.9.1. Objectives for Usability Testing

The objectives of usability testing were as follows:
 To establish usability of MARC Model
 To determine the understandability criterion of MARC Model
 To determine the Learnability criterion of MARC Model
 To determine the Efficiency criterion of the MARC Model
 To determine the memorability criterion of MARC Model
 To determine the satisfactory criterion of MARC Model
 To ascertain usability of each intelligence session
 To identify most preferred intelligence session
 To classify the strengths of MARC model with respect to pre planning,
lesson planning and assessment stages.

3.9.2. Informants: For the usability testing 3 teacher education colleges were
selected. Elaborate usability tests are a waste of resources. The best results
come from testing no more than 5 users and running as many small tests as
you can afford (Jakob Nielsen, 2012). 5 Teacher Educators implemented
the model on total of 47 second year pre service teachers (Batch: 2016 –
17) in separate colleges. Teacher Education colleges used for usability
testing were:
 Adarsha Comprehensive College of Education, Kothrud, Pune
 Azam College of Education, Pune
 MIT VGTTA B.Ed College, Pune
 136

3.9.3. Sampling:
Purposive sampling design was used for the present study.

3.9.4. Tools used for the Usability Testing

The tools used for Objective 4 consisted of Data Collection Tools which
were developed by researcher, Data Analysis Tools and Data
Representation Tools. All the tools used have been shown in the figure 38:

Data Collection Data Representaion

Tools Data Analysis Tools Tools

Usability
Questionnaire for
Teacher Educators &
Usability Scores Tables
Pre service teachers

Usability Questionnaire Grounded

for each intelligence Theory Figures
session Approach

FIGURE 38: Tools for Objective 4

3.9.4.1. Tools for Data Collection:

 A usability questionnaire for teacher educators and Pre service teachers
was developed by the researcher to get the views about the MARC Model
and establish usability of the model.
 Another questionnaire was developed by the researcher to get views about
each intelligence session from the teacher educators and pre service
teachers.
 137

3.9.4.2. Tools Development and Data Collection Procedure:

Figure 39 describes the procedure followed in developing the usability
questionnaire and the procedure of conduction.

Preparation of the Suggestions by

First Draft Experts Pilot Study

Data Analysis and Execution of the Finalization of the

Conclusion usability Testing Questionnaires

FIGURE 39: Procedure of Study

3.9.4.2.1. Development of the First Draft of the Usability Questionnaires:

Two Questionnaires were developed and used for usability testing:
 Usability Questionnaire to determine usability of MARC Model: For teacher
educators and pre service teachers
 Usability Questionnaire to ascertain usability of each intelligence session:
For Teacher educators and pre service teachers

Usability Questionnaire to determine usability of MARC Model: The first draft

of this questionnaire had 27 items. 25 close ended items and 2 open ended items.
Item no. 26 was open ended item which asks the informants to describe the
intelligence session they liked the most with appropriate justification. Item no. 27
was open ended where informants were supposed to mention use of model with
respect to three parts: Pre planning stage, Designing the lesson plan and assessing
the learning outcomes. 25 open ended items were divided into 5 sets each
depending upon the five criterion of usability testing namely Understandability,
 138

Learn ability, Efficiency, Memorability and Satisfactory. All the open ended
questions were related to the ease of using MARC Model and its sessions. The
language for questionnaire used for pre service teachers was modified a bit to suit
their needs but the components and outcome was the same as that of teacher
educators.

Usability Questionnaire to ascertain usability of each intelligence session: The

first draft of this questionnaire consisted of 25 close ended items divided into set
of 5 statements one for each of the 5 criterion of usability testing. The items were
related to the use of intelligence session with respect to understanding the content,
usefulness of resources, amount of information learnt and ease of using further.
Items in both the above questionnaires were provided with a 3 point rating scale:
 To great extent: 3 Points
 Partially: 2 Points
 To less extent: 1 Point
Usability score for the model and each criterion was calculated by adding the
points.

3.9.4.2.2. Content Validation by the Experts:

The draft of the questionnaires was shown to the experts and modifications were
done based in the expert’s feedback as depicted in Table 22. This led to the
finalization of the usability questionnaires.
 139

TABLE 22
Modifications suggested by Experts regarding the Usability
Questionnaire of MARC Model

Modified
Item No. Original Form Suggestions
Version
Yes and No It will be difficult to A rating scale
option were given respond and to score the with 3 options To
by the researcher questionnaire if only yes great extent,
for the teacher or No because mostly Partially and To
Options for
educators and Pre answer might come in less extent was
answer
service teacher to yes. So it must be a 3 or developed with
answer. 4 point rating scale so scores as 3, 2 and
that scores can be 1.
provided for each item
Number of Initially the items Items must be equal Statements were
items under in 3 criterion were under each criterion so added and all
each 5 and in two it as to compare the criterions had 5
criterion was 4 criterions items each.

No major modifications were made with respect to the items. Same modifications
were suggested for the questionnaire to determine usability of each intelligence
session.

3.9.4.2.3. Pilot Study of the Usability Questionnaire:

These questionnaires were pilot tested along with pilot test of MARC model.
After completion of the intelligence session the questionnaire was given to the
group and one questionnaire after completion of the Model. Questionnaire was
given to two teacher educators who were involved in the pilot testing of the
model. No major modifications were suggested by the teacher educators and pre
service teachers.
 140

3.9.4.2.4. Finalization of the Usability Questionnaire:

 Considering the suggestions provided by the experts and after conducting the
pilot study the following usability questionnaires were finalized.
 Usability Questionnaire to determine usability of each intelligence
session: For teacher educators & Pre service Teachers (Appendix E)
 Usability Questionnaire to determine usability of MARC Model: For
teacher educators (Appendix F)
 Usability Questionnaire to determine usability of MARC Model: For pre
service teachers (Appendix G)
Table 23 gives the distribution of the final questionnaire according to the
objectives.
TABLE 23

Objective wise Classification of Usability Questionnaire of MARC Model

Objective Question Nature of

Objectives
Number Number question
1 To establish usability of MARC Model 1 & 25 Close ended
To determine the understandability
2 criterion of MARC Model 1 to 5 Close Ended
To determine the Learnability criterion of
3 6 to 10 Close ended
MARC Model
To determine the Efficiency criterion of
4 the MARC Model 11 to 15 Close Ended
To determine the memorability criterion of
5 16 & 20 Close ended
MARC Model
To determine the satisfactory criterion of
6 MARC Model 21 to 25 Close ended
To identify most preferred intelligence
7 26 Open ended
session
To classify the strengths of MARC model
8 with respect to pre planning, lesson 27 Open ended
planning and assessment stages.
 141

3.9.5. Execution of the Usability Testing:

The questionnaires were given to the teacher educators and pre service teachers
selected for usability testing. After each intelligence session questionnaire was
given to teacher educator and pre service teachers to score the session for its
usability with respect to the selected criteria.
Once the implementation of MARC model was done by the teacher educators’
questionnaire to establish usability of MARC Model was administered on pre
service teachers and teacher educators to score overall MARC Model for its
usability.

3.9.6. Data Analysis Strategy: Usability questionnaire had 3 options for close
ended items namely:
To great Extent: 3 points
Partially: 2 Points
To less Extent: 1 Point
Depending upon the items, highest and lowest score range of the scores was
determined. Total average score for the model was calculated and average score
for each intelligence session was also calculated to make the conclusions. The
grounded theory approach was used to analyze the open ended questions. The
steps of grounded theory were first open coding, followed by Axial Coding and
finally selective coding of the responses was done to make a theory.

3.10. The Research Study at a Glance:

3.10.1. Executing the Pilot Study:

A pilot study of the survey questionnaires was conducted on a group of pre
service teachers and teacher educators teaching in teacher education colleges
affiliated to Savitribai Phule Pune University. Pilot testing was also done of the
MARC Model on pre service teachers of MIT School of Education & Research,
Pune, during the academic year 2014 – 15. Along with this pilot testing of
 142

usability questionnaires was also carried out. The Pilot study was conducted for
the following tools:
 Survey questionnaires
 MARC Model
 Usability Questionnaires

3.10.2. Conducting the Survey:

The survey was conducted on sample of 84 pre service teachers and 33 Teacher
educators from teacher education colleges affiliated to Savitribai Phule Pune
University.

3.10.3. Implementing the MARC Model:

MARC Model was given to 5 teacher educators from 3 different teacher education
colleges to implement and score the model with respect to its usability. Usability
testing was carried out on 47 second year pre service teachers from 3 different
teacher education colleges in Pune City during the academic year 2016 – 17.

3.10.4. Establishing Usability of the MARC Model:

The usability questionnaire for each intelligence session was administered after
completion of the session to both the teacher educators and pre service teachers.
After complete execution of MARC model by the teacher educators’ usability
questionnaire for overall MARC model was given to teacher educators and pre
service teachers to score the overall experience of MARC Model.

3.10.5. Analysis of the Data and Drawing Conclusion:

The data gathered during the study was collected, organized and analyzed.
Conclusions regarding the study were drawn based on the analysis.
 143

TABLE 24

Summary of Chapter III

Objective Methodology Population Sample / Informants Data Analysis Tools

Data Collection Tool
and Techniques

To assess and analyze All the Teacher Purposive: 33 - Questionnaire to Quantitative data
the existing status in Educators teaching Teacher Educators assess use of Multiple analysis: Percentage
the teacher education in teacher teaching in Teacher Intelligences & & Chi square
colleges regarding the Education Colleges Education Colleges lesson Planning
multiple intelligences Survey affiliated to affiliated to Savitribai - Questionnaire to Qualitative data
theory based Savitribai Phule Phule Pune assess use of analysis: Grounded
classroom practices Pune University in University in Pune Reflective Practices Theory
followed by the Pune City City
teacher educators.
 144

Objective Methodology Population Sample / Informants Data Analysis Tools

Data Collection Tool
and Techniques

To assess and analyze All the pre service Purposive: 84 pre - Questionnaire to Quantitative data
the existing status in teachers pursuing service teachers assess use of Multiple analysis: Percentage
the teacher education Bachelors of pursuing Bachelors of Intelligences & & Chi square
colleges regarding the Survey Education Course Education Course lesson Planning
multiple intelligences (B.Ed.) from (B.Ed.) from teacher - Questionnaire to Qualitative data
theory based teacher Education Education Colleges assess use of analysis: Grounded
classroom practices Colleges affiliated affiliated to Savitribai Reflective Practices Theory
followed by the pre to Savitribai Phule Phule Pune
service teachers. Pune University in University in Pune
Pune City. City
 145

Objective Methodology Population Sample / Informants Data Analysis Tools

Data Collection Tool
and Techniques

To develop a
Multiple Intelligences Product - 5 Experts Feedback Sheets for the Frequency
theory based Teacher Development experts regarding the Grounded Theory
Education model Model
(MARC) using
framework of teacher
education models to
train pre service
teachers in teacher
education colleges
using multiple
intelligences in their
teaching learning
practices.
 146

Objective Methodology Population Sample / Informants Data Analysis Tools

Data Collection Tool
and Techniques

To establish Usability Survey for All Teacher and Purposive: 5 Teacher Usability Questionnaires Quantitative data
of the developed usability testing pre service teachers Educators and 47 pre analysis: Scores &
MARC Model from teacher service teachers from Percentage
education colleges 3 teacher education
affiliated to colleges in Pune City Qualitative data
Savitribai Phule analysis: Grounded
Pune University in theory
Pune city.
 147

3.11. Conclusion:

The present chapter describes the procedure of the study. The Chapter provides
with details of the rationale behind the developed Product, the tools selected for
the study and the process of collecting the data. The following chapter will help to
understand the process of data analysis and interpretation.