著者

内藤 裕子

出版者

東北福祉大学教育課程支援室

雑誌

教職研究

巻号頁・発行日

vol.2017, pp.59-67, 2018-03-31

---

本研究の目的は、前調査において項目を集めたPCAGIP法の評価尺度について因子分析および信頼性の検証を行い、評価に影響を与える要因について検討することである。PCAGIP法の実施と調査は養護教諭を目指す学生46人を対象とし、3回のセッションを合わせのべ111人分のデータを用いた。最尤法・プロマックス回転を用いて因子分析を行った結果、5因子が抽出され「難しさ」「省察」「理解の深まり・広がり」「示唆」「受容的な雰囲気」と命名された。5つの下位尺度のクロンバックのα係数は .75~.84を示し、高い信頼性が確認できた。セッションによる評価の違いを検討したところ、1回目より2回目または3回目の評価が高くなり、「難しさ」の1回目と3回目の間に有意差が見られた。2回目と3回目は『金魚鉢』より『金魚』の評価が高く、2回目の「省察」「理解の深まり・広がり」において有意差が見られた。また、「受容的雰囲気」の評価が高い群は低い群に比べて「理解の深まり・広がり」「示唆」の評価が高かった。This study aimed to perform a factor analysis on and verify the reliability of the Evaluation Scale for PCAGIP, which comprises items determined in a preliminary survey, and to examine the factors that influence PCAGIP score. We implemented the PCAGIP and conducted the survey among 46 students of a yoga teacher training course and used date pertaining to all three sessions, representing a total of 111 individuals. As a result of the Maximum-Likelihood factor analysis, we extracted five factors and names them "difficulty," "reflection", "deepening/broadening understanding," suggestions," and "accepting atmosphere." The Cronbach's alphas for the five subscales were in the range of .75-.84, indicating strong reliability. When we examined inter-session score differences, we found that score were higher in session 2 or session 3 than in session 1. We also found a significant difference in the session "difficulty" score between sessions 1 and 3. When we examined differences by role, we found that scores for "kingyobachi" were higher than those for "Kingyo" in session 1. In sessions 2 and 3, scores for "Kingyo" were higher than those for "kingyobachi," and we observed a significant difference in the session 2 scores for "reflection," and "deepening/broadening understanding." Compared to respondents with low overall scores for "accepting atmosphere," those with high overall scores in this item gave higher scores for "deepening/ broadening understanding" and "suggestions."