School climate of adult basic education centres

Abstract

This study explored the school climate of adult basic education centres by investigating the extent to which these education centres showed evidence of control, staff cohesiveness, physical resources, and safe and orderly environment. The study was inspired by a lack of school climate studies that focused on adult basic education centres as many school climate studies had concentrated on investigating the school climate of primary and secondary schools. The broad research question which was addressed in the research study was: ‘What is the nature of the school climate of adult basic education centres as perceived by educators?’ The participating educators were randomly selected and a survey – in the form of a questionnaire – was administered. The questionnaire comprised the four scales mentioned above. The items from the four scales were validated through the use of both face and content-related validity procedures. Face validity was ensured through pre-testing. Content validity was achieved through expert review of the items used. The extent to which these items could be included as part of a scale was further explored by means of reliability analysis whose acceptable coefficient alpha was benchmarked at 0.65 and above. Reliability was used to explore the reliability of the questionnaire. The aspect of reliability used for this purpose was analysis of internal consistency. The main purpose was to ascertain whether all the items used in the four scales collectively measured the construct school climate. For example, the reliability analysis for the variable control had 0.79 as its coefficient alpha whilst the reliability analysis for the variable staff cohesiveness, physical resources and safe and orderly environment had 0.76, 0.89, 0.84 as corresponding coefficient alpha respectively. This implied that most items within the four scales measured the construct control, staff cohesiveness, physical resources, safe and orderly environment as part of the construct school climate. Furthermore, the coefficient alphas of these four scales compared well with the overall coefficient alpha of 0.84 for this study, which further implied that each of the scales had an immense contribution in the measurement of the construct school climate. Based on the scale rubric designed for the variable control (high score 28-21: moderate score 20-14; low score 13-0), the results from the analysis indicated that the centres under review had a fair level of control mechanisms in place as in all these centres the mean score varied between 23 and 25. On the basis of the scale rubric devised for staff cohesiveness (high score 32-24; moderate score 23-16; low score 15-0), it was also revealed that the majority of the centres had evidence of staff cohesiveness, as no low score was recorded for in most cases the mean score revolved between 22 and 25. Although, the results further indicated that there was an average degree of physical resources in most centres, it also became clear that not all centres had the same level of physical resources at their disposal as the majority of the centres had a mean score that fluctuated between 18 and 33. The scale rubric for physical resources was: between 40-30 for high score; between 29-20 for moderate score and between 19-0 for low score. Finally, the mean score for the variable safe and orderly environment alternated between the minimum mean score of 17 and the maximum mean score of 21. Based on the latter mean scores, it became clear that the majority of the centres had a safe and orderly environment level that fell within the moderate score category (between 20-14) whilst the remaining two centres had a high score category (between 28-21) and no centre had a low score category (between 13-0).