Chapter - III

TOOL CONSTRUCTION AND STANDARDIZATION OF

USAGE OF EDUCATIONAL/ NON-EDUCATIONAL
MOBILE APPLICATIONS SCALE

Educational research is a systematic attempt to gain a better understanding of the

educational process, or a problem based on factual information collected from the
respondents. It is is directed towards the solution of a problem in the field of education. So,
it becomes mandatory for a researcher to collect relevant, suitable and sufficient
factual information from the respondents while conducting the research. The research
instruments known as toolsm are used to collect information. These tools help a
researcher to collect the data and testing of the hypothesis of the study. Educational
research is conducted by utilizing the reliable, valid and standardized tools. It includes
standardization of tool also. The content, method of administration, method of scoring
and setting up of norms are various aspects of tool standardization are peculiarities of
research. In the present study tools for usage of mobile applications, self-efficacy and
academic procrastination were required. The available stock of tests and tools needed
for study were searched to locate the suitable tools. The investigator found the tools
for self-efficacy and academic procrastination but no suitable tool in context of
population, locality and language was available for measuring usage of mobile
applications. Thus, it was compulsory for the researcher to construct and standardize
an appropriate tool for measuring usage of mobile applications for undergraduate
students.

3.1. Usage of Mobile Applications Scale

Due to lack of any suitable tool to access Mobile Applications (Educational and Non-
Educational usage) of the teacher in present study, the investigator constructed Usage
of Educational and Non-Educational Mobile Applications Scale, so the investigator
laboriously went through the existing stock of test and tools available. A crit ical
review of relevant existing scales during the past three decades for measuring Usage
of Educational and Non-Educational Mobile Applications was observed.

96
3.2. Need for Development of Tool

For construction of the tool, first of all, some available tools were hunted as an
initial step to collect knowledge regarding existing tools. Though some tools were found;
but were unable to suit the needs of the study. Moreover, these tools were created in
foreign countries and were not culture free and found unsuitable in Indian context. Due to
this reason, construction and standardization of tool for measuring Usage of Educational
and Non-Educational Mobile Applications of undergraduate students was must. The
researcher had decided to develop tool on the basis of available tool in Indian context.

No doubt tool may be constructed in many forms like scale, inventory,

questionnaire, checklist and schedule etc. The checklist and questionnaire are not
developed keeping in view their applicability. As in Questionnaire, checklist mainly two
options are available, so there is delimitation that sometime respondents want to give a
mid way response. While the scale has advantage over these as it provides quantification
of responses and respondents are free to give their views on particular statement in varing
degree. Scales can be easily used for measuring attitudnal situations and are helpful in
reliable and quick assessment of the variables. The scales provide easy and economical
ways for item analysis and can be administred easily. So, the researcher decided to
develop a scale to measure Usage of Educational and Non-Educational Mobile
Applications of undergraduate students.

3.3. Review

The Internet Addiction (IAT) developed by young (1998) is a 20- items sale that
measures the presence and severity of internet dependency among adults. The IAT is to
assess symptoms of Internet addiction and compulsivity in a variety of test settings. The
IAT measure the severity of self-reported compulsive use of the Internet for adults and
adolescence. Result from the IAT should be interpreted with caution among clinical
populations that suffer from psychiatric condition concurrent with compulsive syndromes.
The scale was created by adapting DSM-IV criteria for pathological gambling and is a
modification of the earlier 8 items scale, Young Internet Addition Diagnostic
Questionnaire (IADQ).

97
Khwaileh and Al Jarrah (2010) piloted a questionnaire on an undergraduate and graduate
level to analyse attitudes about the use of mobile devices in terms of their degree of
acceptance in classrooms. The authors confirmed how, in the early stages of integrating
mobile devices in teaching and learning processes, students showed growing interest and
viewed devices as tools that were increasingly inherent to higher education settings.
However, this tool is not centered on IL and omits student perceptions of teachers and
how they implement the use of mobile devices in education.

Woodcock, Middleton and Nortcliffe (2012) carried out a study on implementing

the use of mobile devices, installing and using mobile applications for educational
purposes in higher education, and the benefits they offer. It confirmed that the gradual
growth of their use is proportional to their acceptance, and highlighted certain limitations
and the fact that a student segment is opposed to its use for academic purposes. The tool
used in this study is based on a qualitative methodology and in-depth interviews, so it can
be viewed as one of the few questionnaires of this type to be applied to mobile learning
(m-learning).

Yang (2013) performed a quantitative analysis on the use and social influence of
mobile devices with relation to the teaching and learning processes in universities. The
model set out by the author assumes, through complexity, that when students use smart
phones, their intent is based more on hedonism (personal use that entails satisfaction,
such as communication between equals) than on academic purposes. However, this does
not decrease the importance and growing potential of mobile learning. It also analyses the
drawbacks resulting from distractions or the lack of critical attitudes towards information.

Al Hassan (2016) and Al-Emran, Elsherif and Shaalan (2016), took into account
the use of mobile devices in higher education as well as the attitudes of students and
teachers towards the general use of mobile technologies in the classroom. Both cases
confirm the need to adapt to the new reality and the benefits of using mobile technologies
based on how apps improve the teaching-learning processes. On the other hand, the
setting plays a major role in acquiring those competencies. In any case, MOBILE-APPS
introduces the combination of mobile-information literacy as a strength and an innovative
aspect, as opposed to these two tools, which focus on using mobile devices, without
directly including the mobile information literacy aspect that we believe is at the core of
this study.

98
Doyle, Foster and Yukhymenko (2018) PILS (Students Perception of Information
Literacy Skills) is based on the six fundamental pillars of the Framework for Information
Literacy in Higher Education. The authors use those pillars to establish a scale of
descriptors that define the level of information competency in students for every section,
with seven different levels ranging from beginner to expert. Along these lines, we find
commonalities with MOBILE APPS since this frame of reference is fundamental in both
instances. However, unlike the tools mentioned earlier, PILS only takes into account IL,
without considering the use of mobile devices in the classroom and everything resulting
from digital literacy.

Pinto, Sales, Fernández - Pascual (2018) developed a questionnaire on MOBILE-

APPS questionnaire: Developing and validating a scale for measuring the students’
attitudes and perceptions regarding the use of mobile technologies in the teaching-
learning of information competencies (mobile applications). The questionnaire consists of
four dimensions. The first dimension focuses on information competencies. The tool’s
second dimension is based on the information competencies classified as informational
literate should learn, is that students should develop these skills during their
undergraduate studies. The third dimension is based on the Framework for Information
Literacy for Higher Education and focuses on the key interconnected concepts regarding
information and its use. The last section refers to the use of mobile technologies by
students within the learning process. In addition to covering how devices are used in the
classroom for everyday tasks (such as finding information), it analyses a key question that
arises with the inevitable emergence of technology, meaning by how technology has
influenced analytical-critical skills. The questionnaire was developed and validated in
two-stage sequential validation (rubric distributed among volunteer students followed by
the pilot and focus groups - sample of 44 students selected from Education degree to
analyse the quality/coherence, clarity and usefulness of the content) to confirm the scale’s
reliability and consistency. The pilot questionnaire was then distributed to a second
sample of 105 students to analyse the tool’s reliability and internal validity, scale
validation techniques and exploratory factorial analysis were used. The results showed
favourable psychometric properties in terms of high reliability and a factorial structure in
which the five sections or factors found are in line with the tool’s structure, providing
validity evidence of the proposed categories.

99
3.4. Process of Scale Construction

EDUCATIONAL MOBILE APPLICATIONS AND NON-EDU EDUCATIONAL

MOBILE APPLICATIONS SCALE

Test construction is a complex process; it needs to be done in systematical way as

it requires technical quality as well as the mastery over the content and experience. The
scale construction process was completed in three phases:

a) Planning Stage
b) Construction Stage
c) Standardization Stage

3.4.1. Planning Stage

It is a theoretical procedure dealing with preparation of blueprint of the tool

including type of tool, response pattern, sample, administration, available literature and
persons from whom guidance and assistance can be sought. Planning phase includes
following steps:

i. Identification of components of educational mobile applications and non-

educational mobile applications scale
ii. Operational definition of educational mobile applications and non-educational mobile
applications
iii. Purpose of the tool
iv. Target population
v. Test items
vi. Methodology of scale construction

3.4.1.1. Planning Phase

Planning phase of the tool development involves:- The researcher reviewed the literature
from various sources such as journals, newspapers, books, official sources and web
sources. After considering the definitions, meanings and factors affecting Usage of
Educational Mobile Applications and its four dimensions as well as Usage of Non-
Educational Mobile Applications were decided which were operationally defined as:-

(a) Identification of dimensions of Usage of Educational Mobile Applications and

Usage of Non-Educational Mobile Applications.

100
 (b) Operational Definition of Usage of Educational Mobile Applications and Usage of
Non-Educational Mobile Applications.
(c) Methodology for scale construction

While planning the scale the research followed a five point scale of measurement
for the construction of Usage of Educational Mobile Applications and Usage of Non-
Educational Mobile Applications Scale, so as to determine the influence of Usage of
Educational Mobile Applications and Usage of Non-Educational Mobile Applications on
undergraduate students. The dimensions taken in the scale have been described as given
below:

(a) Identification of the dimensions of the Usage of Educational Mobile Applications

and its four dimension as well as Usage of Educational Mobile Applications

Usage of Educational Mobile Applications/Usage of Non-Educational Mobile

Applications

Functionality - In information technology, functionality mean to perform

functionality is the sum or any aspect of what a product, such as a software application or
computing device, can do for a user. It enables a user to have a set of capabilities.
Functionality Usage of Educational Mobile Applications may or may not be easy to use.

Engagement - Engaging inusage of educational mobile applications for

students is implying positive experiences. It can set the tone for the remainder of their
educational careers. Theelement of engagement involves events like -meeting other
students virtually or learning about the campus before the commencement of classes,
keeping up on events, communicating on specific topics, and asking questions quickly
and conveniently. A mobile app that facilitates social engagement while letting
administrator’s measure levels of use and track emotional trends and potential
problems among the student body serves both communities.

Aesthetic - Aesthetic is the word, which has been derived from the Greek word
aisthetikos, meaning by - aesthetic, sensitive, sentient, pertaining to sense perception; and
aisthetikos has been derived from the word - aisthanomai, meaning by perceive, feel,
sense. Aesthetics quality of Educational Mobiles Apps usage includes the sources of
aesthetic experience, judgment of aesthetic objects or contents such as viewing visual art,

101
sound, reading material, experiencing and duration to respond to queries. Infect aesthetics
in critical usage of educational mobile applications is a reflection to a set of principles or
theory.

Information and sharing quality - Information sharing and knowledge

sharing are closely related concepts that are often used interchangeably. The term
information sharing is usage of educational mobile applications in library and information
science in particular, with researchers coming from different fields. It is computer
interaction that favors the knowledge sharing. Information and sharing can be understood
as a set of activities by which information is provided to others, either proactively or upon
request.

(ii) Usage of Non-Educational Mobile Applications

Functionality - To perform functionality usage of non-educational mobile

applications needs to be stable having reliable workflow. The mobile apps should have
narrow down target audience because the larger groups but at the same time the higher
the odds that there’s something wrong with an app idea. It’s easier to target an innovation
towards a niche.

Engagement - The engagement qualities in non-educational mobile applications

means great execution, integrating it with what people already use makes it easy to offer a
familiar experience, it covers key expectations and needs based on how people use a
specific service and it provides sufficient level of data protection.

Aesthetic - Aesthetics quality of usage of non-educational mobile application

scovers the design, offers quick, hassle-free, easy update procedure. A perfect non-
educational mobile app involves consumer needs, business objectives and technological
solutions to the best extent.

Information and sharing quality - The information has an impact on a

person knowledge that can create a shared, or mutually compatible working and
understanding of the world. The information sharing involves two major aspects, i.e.
giving information to others, and receiving information from the information giver. A
perfect app offers quick access to service desk/help and encourages user retention.

102
 3.4.1.2 Operational Definition

Usage of Mobile Applications: Usage of Mobile Applications is the use of Educational

Mobile Applications and Usage of Non-educational Mobile Applications is the use of
Non-Educational Mobile Applications (business, games, entertainment etc.) by the under
graduate students.

3.4.1.3. Purpose of the Tool

Usage of mobile applications is the use of educational and non-educational applications

Scale is constructed with a purpose to assess use of mobile applications is the use of
educational and non-educational applications among under graduate students.

3.4.1.4. Target Population

In the present study, under graduate students studying in different colleges and
Department of GNDU Amritsar was the target population for the scale.

3.4.1.5. Test Items

The test items of the scale are in the form of statements. The scale contains both positive
and negative items to condense the students’ response hastily and to add diversity in the
scale. The students are provided with five point scale from strongly agree to strongly
disagree to respond to every item so that students may respond as per their preference.

3.4.1.6. Methodology for Scale Construction

The methodology of Likert (1932) was used for scale construction.

3.4.2. Construction phase

On the basis of available literature on Usage of Educational Mobile Applications and

Usage of Non-Educational Applications, a number of statements were framed with the
help of experienced teachers of colleges, college principals and Department heads of
GNDU. Construction stage involved the following steps:

 Preparation of Items Pool

 Editing of Items
 Directions for Respondents
 Try out of Scale
 Item Analysis
 Preparation of the Final Draft
 Scoring system

103
 3.4.2.1. Preparation of Item Pool

Construction of scale starts with the writing of test items. Bean (1953) defines an item
as, ‘a single questioner task that is not often broken down into any smaller units’.
Kaplan and Saccuzo (2009) state items as‘ specific questions or problems that make a
test’. It is a particularimpetus to be responded by the personovertly. Item writing is a
creative work; it depends on the intuition, imagination, experience, practice, ingenuity
and day-to-day experiences of the researcher. A large number of items need to be
written over here; as many of these are eliminated in succeeding analyses (Goswami,
2018). Due to absence of set rules for item writing, the researcher has to be very
careful regarding it.

The researcher tried to search available resources for collecting content for the
tool. On the basis of available literature on usage of educational mobile applicat ions
and usage of non-educational mobile applications, above mentioned four areas of
usage of educational mobile applications and four areas of usage of non-educational
mobile applications were taken into account, while framing statements for the scale. A
number of statements were framed on each area of Usage of Educational Mobile
Applications and Usage of Non-educational Mobile Applications with the help of
experienced colleagues, college principals and students. The statements were then
discussed with supervisor of this research and necessary modifications were made as
per her recommendations.

3.4.2.2. Expert Opinions

Pre-try out in scale construction is known as ‘Jury Opinion’. Expert opinion involves
correcting ambiguous wording, strengthening of weak alternatives and to cut
inappropriate items (Goswami, 2018). So, the constructed scale was given to subject
experts for review and suggestions. The items in the tool were amended as per the
suggestions and comments of the experts. After eliminating/editing/modifying the
items, the items were arranged properly as per suggestions of the experts. The scale
was given to 10 experts, having long experience in the field of education to check the
vagueness, duplication and grammatical correctness.

104
List of subject expert has been given below:
Table-3.1: List of subject experts consulted for scale construction
Sr.
Name Designation
No.
1. Dr. Sarbjit Kaur Principal, Gurusar Sudhar College of Education, Sudhar
Principal, Guru Nanak College Killianwali, Sri Mukatsar
2. Dr. Surinder Singh
Sahib
3. Dr. Mona Anand Principal, MLM Institute of Education, Mudhal, Amritsar
4. Dr. Namesh Kharwal Principal, C.T. College of Education, Jalandhar
5. Dr. Anita Menon Principal, D.A.V. College of Education, Amritsar.
Prof, Khalsa College of Education, Ranjit Avenue,
6. Dr. Surinder Kaur
Amritsar
Associate prof, Khalsa College of Education, Ranjit
7. Dr. Gurmanjit Kaur
Avenue, Amritsar
Dr. Parwinderjit Assistant prof, Khalsa College of Education, Ranjit
8.
Kaur Avenue, Amritsar
9. Dr. Gagandeep Kaur Assistant prof, University Deptt of Education, Amritsar
Associate prof, Ramgarhia College of Education,
10. Dr. Mona Gupta
Phagwara.

The experts were requested to analyse deeply each statement of the scale and to
indicate whether the item was related to the four dimensions of usage of educational
mobile applications and four dimensions of usage of non-educational mobile applications.
Meaning of usage of educational mobile applications and usage of non-educational
mobile applications was written to help the experts and need of the research may be
conveyed. The experts were requested to give their critical and objective opinion for each
statement of the tool. The comments of experts were sought on each item in the form of
accept, reject or modify the particular statement. After the suggestions and comments
received from the experts, the investigator spent time with the help of the supervisor to
consider the opinions of the said experts on the four dimensions of dimensions of usage
of educational mobile applications and four dimensions of usage of non-educational
mobile applications. For the preliminary draft usage of educational mobile applications49
items for and usage of non-educational mobile applications were framed 40 items for and
shown to experts to examine the content, repetitiveness, and ambiguity of the items. 10

105
 experts with long standing experience in the field of teaching at college and university,
levels were approached for this purpose. In this way, a pool of 89 statements was
finalized for the provisional draft of the scale.

Keeping in view their judgment and comments on usage of educational mobile

applications, 8 items were discarded, 2 were reframed and reworded; again on non-
educational mobile applications 1 item was discarded, 1 was reframed and reworded as
shown in table 3.2.

Table 3.2: Description of items dropped or modified

S. No. Nature of Apps Item no. Remarks

1. Usage of Educational Mobile 9, 16, 17,18, 19, 20, 21, 22 Dropped

Applications 1, 11 Modified
2. Usage of Non-Educational Mobile 34 Dropped
Applications 19 Modified

Table 3.2 shows that upon evaluation by the judges 8 items related with usage of
educational mobile applications were dropped, while 2 items were modified; 1 item
related with usage of non-educational mobile applications was dropped, while 1 item was
modified in the light of the suggestions. In this way, a pool of 39 statements related to
usage of educational mobile applications and 35 statements related to usage of non-
educational mobile applications was finalized for the second draft of the scale.

3.4.2.3. Preliminary Draft

On the basis of available literature in the form of journals, article, periodicals,

theses and books etc. related to usage of educational/ non-educational mobile applications
and its effect on graduate students studying in the different Departments/ colleges of
GNDU across professional and non-professional courses and streams, above mentioned
four areas of usage of educational mobile applications and four area of usage of
educational mobile applications were taken into account, while framing statements for the
scale. A number of statements were framed on each area of Educational Mobile Apps
usage and Non-Educational Mobile Apps usage with the help of experienced colleagues,
college principals and department teachers. The statements were then discussed with
supervisor of the research work and necessary modifications were made. For the first
draft to frame usage of educational mobile applications 49 items and usage of non-
educational mobile applications41 items were tentatively framed in the form of

106
 statements The distribution of positive and negative items for the first draft has been
given in table 3.3.

Table 3. 3. Showing Dimension-Wise Distribution of Positive and Negative Items in

the First Draft of Dimensions of Usage of Educational Mobile
Applications/ Non-Educational Mobile Applications Scale for Students
Sr. Dimensions of Sr. No. of Positive and Negative Items in each
No. Usage of Dimension Items in
Educational each
Mobile Positive Items (+) Negative Items (-) Dimension
Applications
I. Functionality 1,2,3,4,6,7,8,9 5 9

II. Engagement 10,11,12,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23 13,14 13

III. Aesthetic 24,26,28,29,32,33,35 25,27,30,31,34, 36 13

Information
IV and sharing 37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,49 48 14
quality
Total 49
Sr. Dimensions of Sr. No. of Positive and Negative Items in each
No Usage of Non- Dimension Items in
Educational each
Mobile Positive Items (+) Negative Items (-) Dimension
Applications

I. Functionality 1,2,3,4,5 - 4

II. Engagement 7,9,11,12,13,14,15 6,8,10 11

III. Aesthetic 16,18,19,20,23 17,21,22 8

Information
24,25,26,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,36,37,
IV. and sharing 27,35 18
38,39,40,41
quality

Total 41

107
 3.4.2.4. Instructions to the Respondents

Following instructions were mentioned on the top of the scale for respondents:

i. Fill the following particulars regarding name, father’s name, date of birth, sex,
age, class, caste, percentage of marks in previous class, nature of family and
locale.
ii. This scale includes 49 items for Educational Mobile Apps usage and 41 items for
Non-Educational Mobile Apps usage.
iii. Each item has five options from strongly agree to strongly disagree for response.
iv. Put  in the box as per your response.
v. No response is right or wrong.
vi. Please give your response for all the statements.
vii. No time limit to response the scale..

3.4.2.5. Pilot Study of the Scale

The pilot study was done with the aim to take decision about items on the basis of
statistical method. 200 undergraduate students of Ist year to final year of graduation were
selected for pilot study on Usage of Educational Mobile Apps and Usage of Non-
Educational Mobile Apps scale. Five colleges/ Departments were selected from Amritsar
district of Punjab state. Responses collected from 200 students were used for item
analysis.

Table-3.4 shows the details of schools and students selected from each colleges/
Deptts for pilot study.

Table 3.4: Showing description of colleges and number of students selected for pilot
study of Usage of Educational Mobile Apps and Usage of Non-
Educational Mobile Apps Scale (N=200)
Sr. No. Description of School Total
1. Khalsa College of Education, Ranjit Avenue, Amritsar 40
2. DAV College of Education, Beri Gate, Amritsar 40
3. Khalsa College for Women, Amritsar. 40
4. Department of ICT of GNDU, Amritsar. 40
5. Department of Physiotherapy, Amritsar. 40

108
 3.4.2.6. Editing of the Items

On the basis of available literature in the form of journals, article, periodicals, theses and
books etc. related to usage of educational/ non-educational mobile applications and its
effect on graduate students studying in the different Departments/ colleges of GNDU
across professional and non-professional courses and streams, above mentioned four
areas of usage of educational mobile applications and four area of usage of educational
mobile applications were taken into account, while framing statements for the scale. A
number of statements were framed on each area of Educational Mobile Apps usage and
Non-Educational Mobile Apps usage with the help of experienced colleagues, college
principals and department teachers. The statements were then discussed with supervisor
of the research work and necessary modifications were made. For the first draft to frame
usage of educational mobile applications 49 items and usage of non-educational mobile
applications41 items were tentatively framed in the form of statements. The distribution
of positive and negative items for the first draft has been given in table 3.5.

Table 3.5: Showing Dimension-Wise Distribution of Positive and Negative Items in

the First Draft of Dimensions of Usage of Educational Mobile
Applications/ Non-Educational Mobile Applications Scale for Students
Sr. Dimensions of Sr. No. of Positive and Negative Items in each Items in
Usage of Dimension each
No.
Educational Dimension
Mobile Positive Items (+) Negative Items (-)
Applications

I. Functionality 1,2,3,4,6,7,8,9 5 9

II. Engagement 10,11,12,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23 13,14 13

III. Aesthetic 24,26,28,29,32,33,35 25,27,30,31,34, 36 13

Information and
IV 37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,49 48 14
sharing quality

Total 49

109
 Dimensions of Sr. No. of Positive and Negative Items in each
Usage of Non- Dimension Items in
Sr.
Educational each
No Negative
Mobile Positive Items (+) Dimension
Items (-)
Applications
I. Functionality 1,2,3,4,5 - 4
II. Engagement 7,9,11,12,13,14,15 6,8,10 11
III. Aesthetic 16,18,19,20,23 17,21,22 8
Information and 24,25,26,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,36,37,
IV. 27,35 18
sharing quality 38,39,40,41
Total 41

First Try-out and Evaluation-These experts were personally requested to go

through the items and give serious reflection over every statement and to respond
critically and objectively with their comments and observations. The investigator along
with her supervisor devoted several sittings, to consider the judgments of the said experts
on the statements relating to different dimensions of usage of educational mobile
applications and usage of non-educational mobile applications. Keeping in view their
judgment and comments on usage of educational mobile applications, 8 items were
discarded, 2 were reframed and reworded; again on non-educational mobile applications 1
item was discarded, 1 was reframed and reworded as shown in table 3.6.

Table 3.6: Description of items dropped or modified

S. No. Nature of Apps Item no. Remarks

1. Usage of Educational Mobile 9, 16, 17,18, 19, 20, 21, 22 Dropped

Applications 1, 11 Modified
2. Usage of Non-Educational 34 Dropped
Mobile Applications 19 Modified

Table 3.6 shows that upon evaluation by the judges 8 items related with usage of
educational mobile applications were dropped, while 2 items were modified; 1 item
related with usage of non-educational mobile applications was dropped, while 1 item was
modified in the light of the suggestions. In this way, a pool of 39 statements related to
usage of educational mobile applications and 35 statements related to usage of non-

110
 educational mobile applications was finalized for the second draft of the scale. This
second draft of usage of educational mobile applications and usage of non-educational
mobile applications scale comprising of 69 statements was put in the form of a scale
booklet under the eight dimensions of usage of educational / non-educational mobile
applications along with the number of positive and negative items assigned to each area
as shown in table 3.7.

Table 3.7. Showing Dimension-Wise Distribution of Positive and Negative Items in

the First Draft of Dimensions of Usage of Educational Mobile
Applications/ Non-Educational Mobile Applications Scale for Students
Sr. Dimensions of
No. Usage of Sr. No. of Positive and Negative Items in each Dimension Items in
Educational each
Mobile Positive Items (+) Negative Items (-) Dimension
Applications
I. Functionality 1,2,3,4,6,7,8,9 5 9
II. Engagement 10,11,12,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23 13,14 13
III. Aesthetic 24,26,28,29,32,33,35 25,27,30,31,34, 36 13
Information and
IV 37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,49 48 14
sharing quality
Total 48
Sr. Dimensions of
No Usage of Non- Sr. No. of Positive and Negative Items in each Dimension
Educational
Mobile Positive Items (+) Negative Items (-)
Applications
I. Functionality 1,2,3,4,5 - 4
II. Engagement 7,9,11,12,13,14,15 6,8,10 11
III. Aesthetic 16,18,19,20,23 17,21,22 8
Information and 24,25,26,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,36,37,
IV. 27,35 18
sharing quality 38,39
Total 39

Thus second draft of Usage of Educational/ Non-Educational Mobile

Applications scale for students of undergraduate classes comprised of 48 items with 38
positive and 10 negative items; and out of 39 items 31 positive and 8 negative items, are
finalized for second draft.
3.4.3. SECOND DRAFT OF USAGE OF EDUCATIONAL AND NON-
EDUCATIONAL MOBILE APPLICATIONS SCALE
The second draft of the usage of educational/ non-educational mobile applications scale
was consisted of those items which were modified or revised taking the opinion given by
experts.

111
3.4.3.1. Second Try-out and Evaluation

The second draft of the usage of educational and non-educational mobile

applications scale for undergraduate students comprised of 48 items for Usage of
Educational Mobile Applications and 39 items for Usage of Non-Educational Mobile
Applications was administrated to sample of 200 students studying in the GNDU and
colleges affiliated to it for items validity. The details of sample structure for try out for
second draft of the usage of educational mobile applications and usage of educational
mobile applications scale have been given table 3.8.

Table 3.8: Selection of students for second try-out from College/Departments of

GNDU
S. Name of the Nature of Courses Stream Total
No. College/Department Professional/Non Science/Social
Professional Science

1. Baring Union Christian Non-Professional Social Science 25

College, Batala (Gurdaspur)

2. Batala College of Education, Professional Science 50

Bullowal (Gurdaspur)

3. Baring Union Christian Non-Professional Science 25

College, Batala (Gurdaspur)

4. Khalsa College Amritsar Professional Science 50

Deptt. of Agriculture
(Amritsar)

5. Khalsa College of Education Professional Social Science 50

G.T. Road (Amritsar)

Total 200

The table 3.8 shows that the responses of the subjects were scored as per allotted
weightage. The weighted score for each item and for each subject were summated. On
the basis of total scores 27%subjects with high scores i.e. high group and 27%
subjects with low scores i.e. low group were identified. The scored response in terms
of weighted scores for each items were worked out. Items analysis was carried out by
it employing t-test for 48 items related with Usage of Educational and 39 items related
with Usage of Non-Educational Mobile Applications for high and low group. The t-

112
ratio was computed for the higher and lower group to find discriminating power of
each item i.e. how well each statement could distinguish on the basis of the value of t
-ratio, between students with positive and negative usage of educational and non-
educational mobile applications scale. Initially items with t-value significant at 0.01
level of confidence were selected for the scale, In order to prepare the final draft, All
items significant at 0.05 level were also retained and selected. The t ratio for 19 i tems
was not significant even at 0.05 level of significant. The t- ratio of 48 items for usage
of educational mobile applications and 39 items for usage of non-educational mobile
applications have been placed in table 3.9.

Table 3.9: t-ratios of each items of Usage of Educational Mobile Applications Scale

Item t-ratio Item No t-ratio Item No t-ratio

1 2.89** 17 1.85 33 2.19*

2 .83 18 4.01** 34 2.25*

3 4.35** 19 .99 35 2.59**

4 3.11** 20 3.05** 36 2.89**

5 1.74 21 .00 37 4.06**

6 5.56** 22 .70 38 2.48*

7 1.81 23 3.81** 39 3.29**

8 4.86** 24 1.13 40 3.14**

9 1.70 25 1.89 41 2.57*

10 1.82 26 1.98* 42 4.55**

11 .330 27 4.12** 43 5.85**

12 2.30* 28 2.19* 44 1.91

13 2.94** 29 .22 45 2.21*

14 3.68** 30 3.08** 46 2.09*

15 .00 31 1.90 47 .93

16 .27 32 2.19* 48 1.64

*Significant at 0.05 level ** Significant at 0.01level

113
The table 3.9 shows that t- ratio number 2, 5, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 15, 16, 17, 19, 21, 22, 24,
25, 29, 31, 44, 47 and 48 and was not found significant even at 0.05 level of significance.
Hence, 19 items were dropped and 29 were retained.

Table 3.10: t-ratios of Usage of Non-Educational Mobile Applications Scale

Item t-ratio Item No t-ratio Item No t-ratio

1 2.90** 14 1.65 27 3.41**
2 1.67 15 2.68** 28 1.98*
3 3.15** 16 1.44 29 6.99**
4 3.97** 17 5.95** 30 1.37
5 2.84** 18 5.80** 31 1.98*
6 3.13** 19 1.73 32 5.20**
7 2.50* 20 3.03** 33 3.75**
8 5.61** 21 1.42 34 2.80**
9 .41 22 4.23** 35 4.51**
10 3.83** 23 3.79** 36 .63
11 .59 24 3.85** 37 1.02
12 1.50 25 2.51* 38 1.89
13 3.90** 26 .20 39 3.61**

*Significant at 0.05 level ** Significant at0.01level

The table 3.10 shows that t- ratio numbered 2, 9, 11, 12, 14, 16, 19, 21, 26, 30, 36,
37 and 38 were not found significant at 0.05 level of confidence. Hence, 13 items were
dropped and 25 were retained.

3.4.4. Final Draft of the Usage of Educational/ Non-Educational Mobile

Applications scale

The final draft of Usage of Educational/ Non-Educational Mobile Applications

Scale consisted of 54 items. The distribution of positive and negative items in the final
draft of Usage of Educational/ Non-Educational Mobile Applicationsscale has been given
in table 3.11.

114
 Table 3.11: Distribution of positive and negativeitems for the final draft

Statement Item No. Total

Usage of Positive Items Negative Items

Educational
Mobile 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 16, 17, 2, 7, 13, 15, 18, 21, 29
Applications 19, 20, 22, 23, 24, 25,26, 27, 28, 29

Statement Item No. Total

Usage of Non- Positive Items Negative Items
Educational Mobile
1, 2, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10,11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 3, 5, 6, 17 25
Applications 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25
Total 25
Total Items of Usage of Educational/ Non-Educational Mobile Applications Scale 54

Table 3.8 shows that out of a total 48 items, 29 for Usage of Educational Mobile
Applications and out of a total 35 items, 25 for Usage of Non-Educational Mobile
Applications Scalewere retained. Out of the final draft, 23 positive and 6 negative items
were retained on Usage of Educational Mobile Applications; and 21 positive and 4
negative items were retained on Usage of Non-Educational Mobile Application. The final
draft of Usage of Educational/ Non-Educational Mobile Applications scale consisting 54
items has been given in Appendix A.

3.4.4.1. Scoring

Each item has a response option on Likert’ five points continuum viz, Strongly Agree,
Agree, undecided, Disagree and Strongly Disagree with respective weights of 5, 4, 3, 2
and 1 for the positive statements and 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 for the negative statements. The
scoring procedure adopted is presented below in table 3.12.

Table 3.12: Scoring procedure for each item of Usage of Educational/ Non-
Educational Mobile Applications scale
Score assigned
Items Strongly Agree Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly Disagree
Positive 5 4 3 2 1
Negative 1 2 3 4 5

Table 3.12 shows that Usage of Educational/ Non-Educational Mobile

Applications scores of the subject is the sum total of item scores of all the statements. The
theoretical range of score on this scale is from 54 to 270. High score on the Usage of

115
 Educational/ Non-Educational Mobile Applications scale corresponds to positive
perception of usage of educational/ non-educational mobile applications among
undergraduate students and low score on the Usage of Educational/ Non-Educational
Mobile Applications scale corresponds to positive perception vice-versa.

3.4.4.2. Directions for Respondents

On the top of the booklet, the following directions were given for respondents-

(i) Please fill the information regarding your name, age, class, stream, gender,
marital status, name of course. Department, duration to use daily and number of
downloaded Educational/ Non Educational Mobiles Applications).
(ii) Read the instructions carefully.
(iii) There are number of statements in this booklet. You are requested to read each
statement carefully and also see to what extent that statement is applicable in
your case. For indicating the degree of applicability a five-point scale is given
against each statement like below:-
Response Alternative
Statement Strongly Strongly
Agree Undecided Disagree Score
Agree Disagree
1. Educational Mobile
Applications are
helpful in my
studies

After reading the statement, put a mark of tick (√) in the cell which is best suitable to you.
(iv) Do not to leave any statement unanswered.
(v) Information given by you will be kept confidential.

3.5. Standardization Phase

3.5.1. Determination of the Reliability of the Scale
There are many methods by which the reliability of the test measures can be established.
Guilford (1979) has suggested three general categories namely:
(i) Alternative forms reliability.
(ii) Retest reliability or test – retest reliability.
(iii) Internal consistency reliability or simply internal consistency.

116
All these methods have a common approach of obtaining the two sets of measures from
the same scale and administer to the same sample for the purpose of finding co-efficient
of reliability.
As the scale being heterogeneous and items having been arranged logically, the
two halves could not have been identical. Therefore, test-retest reliability criterion was
found to be the most suitable for determining the reliability of this scale. For establishing
the reliability of the usage of educational and Non-Educational mobile applications Scale,
the scale was administered to 100 students. To the same students, the same scale was
administered after the gap of one month for the test-retest reliability. The product moment
co-efficient of correlation between two sets of scores was found to be 0.79 for Usage of
Educational and 0.67 for Non- Educational Mobile Applications Scale. This was fairly
high to testify the soundness of the scale.
Cronbach’s alpha reliability was also calculated and found to be 0.76. The
Summary of reliability values were shown in table 3.13.

Table 3.13. Showing Reliability Coefficient of Usage of Educational/ Non-

Educational Mobile Applications Scale

Measure of Usage of Mobile Sample size (N) Reliability Coefficient

Reliability Applications Scale

Test-Retest Educational 100 0.79

Non-Educational 100 0.46

3.5.2. Inter-Item Consistency Reliability

Cronbach’s alpha was employed for internal consistency, which is a pairwise
correlations between items. Closeness of associated set of items; as a group is measured
through it. The inter-item consistency of the scale is computed dimension wise and shown
in Table-3.14.

Table-3.14: Showing reliability index of Usage of Mobile Applications Scale

Measure of Usage of Mobile Sample size (N) Reliability

Reliability Applications Scale Coefficient

Test-Retest Educational 100 0.74

Non-Educational 100 0.65

117
As the reliability of the scale is high, it can be concluded that the scale is reliable to assess
Usage of Educational/ Non- Educational Mobile Applications Scale of undergraduate
students.

3.5.3. Establishing the Validity of the Scale

Validity stands for truth and fidelity of a research tool. Validity means the degree to
which a test measures what it claims to measure (Mohan, 2016). It indicates how much
accurate a test scale is. The Validity deas with generalization. A test is contemplated to be
valid, when the conclusions can be established in relation to the population of
investigation. Validity for the standardized scale is classified in three major categories:
content validity, face validity and concurrent validity.

3.5.4. Content Validity

The content validity of a scale involves the systematic evaluation of test content; which is
used to determine the behavior of the representative sample. As at the initial stage, the
scale was shown to experts for obtaining their verdict on validity; only those items were
selected to which the experts agreed. Moreover, items of the scale were selected only
after carefully scrutinizing the definitions of Usage of Educational and Non- Educational
Mobile Applications Scale; hence scale has fair degree of content validity.

3.5.5. Face Validity

Face validity is the level to which a test appears to measure an attribute as

assessed by all concerned (Mohan, 2016); and the main intention of face validity is to
ascertain rapport and cooperation (Chauhan, 2012). The face validity identifies whether
the scale considers valid to the respondents who take it (Anastasi, 1968).

Face validity of Usage of Educational and Non- Educational Mobile Applications Scale
was confirmed by having the views and reactions of the students for whom it is meant.
The scale was shown to the prominent educationist and psychologist. Its language, size,
instructions and format was found appropriate for the respondents. The scale has fair face
validity as all experts had given common contribution.

3.5.6. Preparation of the Norms of the Scale

Norms of a standardized test provides a basis for the practical interpretation and analysis
of results. A set of norms was prepared after collecting final data on the sample of 200
students on Usage of Educational and Non-Educational Mobile Applications Scale

118
constructed by investigator. The obtained raw scores (X) were tabulated in the ascending
order. For the purpose of interpretation of scores, these raw scores were put into three
categories by using criterion Mean+-SD as shown in the Table 3.15.

Table 3.15. Showing Interpretation of Derived Scores

Raw Scores (X) Interpretation

100 and below Low Level of Usage of Educational and Non- Educational Mobile
Applications Scale

011-150 Average Level of Usage of Educational and Non- Educational

Mobile Applications Scale

151 and above High Level of Usage of Educational and Non- Educational Mobile
Applications Scale

The scores below 100 indicate low level of Usage of Educational and Non- Educational
Mobile Applications Scale; the scores between 101 and 150 depict average level of Usage
of Educational and Non- Educational Mobile Applications Scale, whereas scores 151 and
above indicate high level of Usage of Educational and Non- Educational Mobile
Applications Scale.

119