Pakistan Education Review

1

2 PAKISTAN EDUCATION REVIEW EDITORIAL BOARD Patron-in-Chief Professor Dr. Shoukat Ali Siddiqui Patron Dr Shafqat Ali Janjua Chairman Pakistan Education Foundation AEO Sector Urban-I, FDE Editor Dr Maqsood Ahmed Principal, Islamabad Model School for Boys No. 2, I-9/4 Islamabad

3 Table of Contents S. # Title Page # 1. Development and Validation of Social Intelligence Scale for School Teachers Dr. Muhammad Afzal, Dr Maqsood Ahmed & Dr Muhammad Qamar ud Din 2. Exploring the Heads’ Leadership Practices on Four Dimensions of Distributed Leadership in Islamabad Capital Territory Dr Maqsood Ahmed, Dr Munazza Ambreen & Dr Ishtiaq Hussain 3. Evaluation of Mathematics Question Papers Administered by the Federal Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education (FBISE), Islamabad: Using Item Analysis Dr Shahzad Ahmad, Momna Ahmad Qureshi & Sadia Jamil 4. Social-Emotional Teaching Competence of School Teachers: A Comparison of SelfAssessment and Observational Score Dr Muhammad Afzal 5. A Comparison of Teaching Proficiency of Science Teachers Having B.S. Education Degree and B.Sc. B.Ed. Degree Dr Muhammad Basharat 6. Comparison Of Students’ Engagement Level: An Evidence of Public and Private Secondary Schools In Islamabad Dr Ehsan Mahmood & Dr Javid Iqbal 7. Exploring the Self-Regulated Learning Skills of Distance Learners Abida Noreen & Dr. Zaheer Ahmad

4 PER 01-01-22 Development and Validation of Social Intelligence Scale for School Teachers Dr. Muhammad Afzal [email protected] Dr. Maqsood Ahmad Dr. Qamar Ud Din ABSTRACT The present research was undertaken to develop and validate a scale for social intelligence for school teachers. Attributes of social intelligence were taken from the Albrecht model of social intelligence. The model consists of five sub-constructs. These are situational Awareness, Presence, Authenticity, Clarity, and Empathy called the SPACE model of social intelligence. Initially, 54 items were developed using a literature review. These items were given to nine experts in the field. These experts included psychologists and teachers. They rated all items on three points Likert Scale, as aligned, partially aligned, and not aligned. After their responses three items were deleted so, the remaining items were 51. The content validity index calculated as per the universal agreement method is .94. These 51 items scale was distributed among 200 teachers. The scale was passed through rigorous testing for reliability and the final scale has 37 items with .884 Cronbach Alpha. Items that did not contribute to reliability were excluded from the scale. The scale also meets the requirements of internal consistencies, factor analysis, and inter-item correlation. Key Words: Social intelligence, Albrecht’s Model, School Teachers In his piece for Harper's Monthly in 1920, Thorndike recognized the significance of interpersonal success in many spheres of life, including leadership. The best technician in manufacturing might not succeed as a manager due to a lack of social intelligence (Goleman, 2006). Goleman (2006) describes an event from the American War on Iraq in the prologue to his landmark book, Social Intelligence: The New Science of Human Relationships, where a group of troops gathered outside a mosque and inquired about the top clerics for the distribution of assistance supplies. The locals believed they were detaining their imam. So many people gathered and started shouting. Lieutenant Colonel Christopher Hughes, the senior officer, told his soldiers to pace their rifles to the ground while kneeling. At this sight, most of the agitated civilians started smiling at them. This act of mindfulness broke the language and cultural barriers and eased a tense situation. In a similar situation, when someone dumps his toxic behavior on us, he activates the same neuro-circuitry in us and we behave in the same manner. Goleman links people to people's interaction with neuro-circuitry and says emotions are contagious. But emotions cannot be separated from the relationship as all emotions are driven by social interaction. This is just as the brain’s social and emotional states overlap, in the same way, emotions and social relationships overlap at points (Goleman, 2006). According to neuro-science our brain's design makes it gregarious and drawn into brain-to-brain linkup when we interact with other persons and those emotions precede cognitions. In other words, our brain carries all information to the emotional center first and then to the cognition center (Rapheal & Paul, 2017). It implies that interactions, which further mold our social relationships, are the source of feelings. The ability to control our potential and emotions for a healthy connection is the core of emotional intelligence, but in social situations, the focus expands from one-person psychology to two-person psychology, which develops as we connect.

5 Our biology is also shaped by our relationships, in addition to our experiences. Healthy relationships are beneficial, whilst unhealthy ones slowly deteriorate our well-being (Goleman, 2006). The social portion of the brain constantly tunes us in to and is influenced by the internal state of the individuals we are with. This social interaction has an impact on our brain as well, as a process known as neuroplasticity shapes the number, size, and form of neurons as well as their synaptic connections in response to repeated experiences. We can therefore change the form of our brain by doing something every day for years (Cacioppo & Berntson, 2009). Goleman (2006) asserts that there are two ways for our brain to process information. The first is taking the easy route. It moves quickly and consistently without conscious thought. The majority of our activities are guided by our emotional life and low-road neurocircuitry. The high road, on the other hand, makes a purposeful, deliberate effort. By taking the high road and making a conscious effort, we can become conscious of and gain control over our brain's activity. This high road is what we use when we are considering how to approach someone. The high road is logical, whereas the down road is emotional and moist. With the development of Gardner's Many bits of Intelligence and neuroscience, intelligence other than IQ gained momentum because Gardner sought to link his theory of multiple intelligences to recent advances in the study of the brain rather than focusing on testing methods (McQuade, 2013). According to brain research, the amygdala (a region of the brain) is crucial for memory, emotions, reasoning, and reason (Jensen, 2000). Mirror neurons, according to additional brain studies, are crucial for molding our ideas and behaviors. The people in our lives have a significant impact on these processes (LeDoux, 2008). Goleman (2006) condensed research results into the following sentences: “Neuroscience has discovered that our brain’s very design makes it sociable inexorably drawn in an intimate brain to brain linkup whenever we engage with another person. That neural bridge lets us affect the brain and so, the body of everyone we interact with, just as they do us. Even our most routine encounters act as regulators in the brain, priming our emotions, some desirable others not. The strongly connected we are with someone emotionally, the greater the mutual force.” Understanding one's immediate environment and acting in a socially positive manner is central to models of social intelligence. The cognitive component is knowing the present world; the knowledge component and the context in which it occurs are inextricably linked. For instance, slurping your soup is considered polite in Japan since it indicates gratitude, yet it is considered impolite in Germany. Therefore, a behavior's social intelligence depends on the context in which it occurs. However, the social cognitive component of cognition is viewed as a necessary but insufficient precondition for socially intelligent conduct. While acting in social contexts, social awareness also benefits one's interests. So, all social intelligence theories emphasize social cognition before use. Every day, we encounter many different people. Some of these make us happy and nourished to be around. Others are poisonous. They drive us away. Similar to this, we have numerous people in our lives who we respect, feel at ease with, care about, and affirm. Some people exhibit behavior that is more upbeat and encouraging than other people. We also know that these uplifting and nourishing individuals are more knowledgeable about their hazardous surroundings. Positive people appear to "get it"; they are aware that people reflect their thoughts in their interactions, going beyond simple displays of "good" behavior (Albrecht, 2006). More socially intelligent is the individual whose interactions continue to be nourishing, who has the insight and conducts themselves properly, and who has a greater understanding of human interaction. Social intelligence includes both conduct and insight. Thank you and please

6 are social skills, but it extends beyond that. They frequently negotiate social circumstances with such expertise and in a way that is appropriate for the social setting because of this knowledge of social situations (Albrecht, 2006). Albrecht bases his five separate aspects of competence in his concept of social intelligence on experiences and common sense. Situational Awareness, Presence, Authenticity, Clarity, and Empathy are together referred to as SPACE. Situational awareness is the first of these. This ability to understand context and people in terms of their potential intentions and emotional states is a type of social receptor. Perfect situational awareness indicates that a person is considerate of other people and has good interpersonal skills. It would likely be more challenging to win someone over if they are self-centered and obsessed with their problems. It is triangular (Albrecht, 2006). One is the context of proxemics. It has to do with how people interact in a physical world that is dynamic. It has to do with how we organize our physical surroundings and how they influence how we act. Space has influence. A sense of humility is created when one enters Ka, Ba, or any other location of religious or cultural dominance. Rarely do we hear someone shouting or witness parents telling kids to be quiet in public areas. There are three primary degrees of proxemics context, depending on the degree of affinity: a. public space is an extended area that is a distance kept between a listener and a speaker usually 12 to 25 feet. b. social space is a more immediate space is the distance between professional colleagues in communication or individuals in public places is from 4 to 10 feet. c. Personal space is the proxemics bubble surrounding oneself the distance between intimate friends or family members, or between individuals waiting in line, is 2 to 4 feet (Trifu, 2017). Another dimension of social awareness is the behavioural context. It is the pattern of actions, emotions, motivation, and intentions that we show up in the interaction with people with who we are occupied within the situation. It is shared expectations, rules, norms, and customs for behaving in a particular context. When people share the same norms, they get along easily. If they do not share or violate, conflict may arise. The semantic context is the kind of language practiced in the discourse that signals overtly or covertly, the nature of the relationship, differences in status, or social class. Language habits produce or inhibit ruling social standards and the extent of comprehension. Words have a life of their own. They are the very structure of thoughts. Leaders use the psychology of language and use it to arouse mobilization for good and bad. Poetry, art, analogies, popular slogans, and patriotic songs all can profoundly impact people. (Albrecht, 2006). Words may make a situation better or turn into a total failure, conflict, and maladjustment. In his theory of general semantics, Korzybski (1933) describes how language shapes human thoughts. According to Korzybski (1993), we exist in a semantic world. This environment is made of common traditions, symbols habits, language, meaning, and connotation, and has implications within which we come across each other and can make ourselves understood. Albrecht (2006) gives suggestions on how to build situational awareness. These are i. Sit in a public space and try to comprehend the kind of relationship you see between groups, families, and couples. How do they pass relationship or affiliation? How do they convey love and affirmations?

7 ii. Study the physical environment you find yourself in. Who is having seat we're in the business meeting and iii. Practice the linguistic frameworks you'll come across during the day. How do people of varied social statuses use language to communicate their membership? iv. Study the non-verbal signs people pass to clarify and reaffirm their relationship. What are the boss's methods for conveying authority and approachability? Presence is the second component of social intelligence. It refers to the methods you employ to persuade people or groups, including your outward look, your attitude or demeanor, your body language, and how you occupy space in a room. Based on your appearance, others may assume that you are confident, competent, kind, shy or friendly, insecure, hostile, or apathetic. Albrecht (2006) contends that one can develop presentation skills by i. Finding your most natural way ii. Write a description of yourself or the person who met you. What would you want people to say about you? iii. Do self-reflection by recording your message. Authenticity is the third component of Albrecht's (2006) social intelligence model. This characteristic indicates your level of sincerity and honesty with those around you as well as with yourself at any given time. Do you make friends with people you can use? Do you maintain a large contact list yet just have a few true friends? Do you manipulate people or are they manipulating you? Despite your best efforts, is the goal of your behavior to get others' approval? Clarity is the fourth component of social intelligence. The individual can articulate his or her feelings, thoughts, ideas, opinions, and intentions. Do you convey yourself clearly when you speak too quickly? Do your tone, rate, and loudness convey respect or inspire skepticism? Measurement of Social Intelligence Thorndike and Saul (1937) report that social intelligence is difficult to measure due to the following reasons: a) The word social has different meanings b) Those attempting to assay interest or altitude and c) Those measuring items of the required information d) The multi-faceted nature of social intelligence. According to Sharma (2012), social intelligence is challenging to assess because it is influenced by culture. Culture is made up of explicit and implicit behavioral patterns acquired and passed down through symbols, and it is the singular accomplishment of human societies (Kroeber & Kluckhohn, 1952). Culture is anticipated to have a significant role in the development of social competence, which is acquired during the socialization process (Sharma, 2012). According to Arif, Mujtaba, and Afzal (2012), high context cultures, which include

8 Pakistan, rely extensively on their surroundings and employ nonverbal cues to exchange and comprehend messages. With less emphasis on being task- or fact-focused, this calls for a high level of social competency where people must be sensitive to others, exhibit empathy, value relationships, and network. Collectivism is a feature of high culture. The fact that a single metric is insufficient for all age groups presents another challenge. Social acumen essentially rises with age (Hunt, 1928). An average rise in social intelligence from high school to college, where age is one crucial element, is 50%, compared to a 15% gain in recall for faces and names. Additionally, older people are better at handling social situations. In general, social intelligence appears to be significantly influenced by age, the stage of life at which changes take place, and specific experiences rather than age. Weis (2008) reports three approaches adapted to the measurement of social intelligence. These are the implicit theory approach, self-report inventories, and behavior-based rating. All these have their own merits and demerits. The current study adapted Likert’s Scale with a self-report measure for measuring social intelligence. The Likert scale is used in the measurement of opinion, beliefs, and attitudes. It is used in behavioral, social, and emotional self-report measurement (Devellis, 2017). Self-report measures are particularly beneficial when a greater insight is required into a phenomenon (Darling-Hammond, 2013., Hinchey, 2010., Kyriakides, Cambell & Christofiden, 2002., Litle, Geo & Bell, 2009). Objectives of the study To develop and validate a scale for measuring social intelligence for school teachers. Methodology For this scale development, the procedure given by Devellis (2017) was adopted. The scale was developed keeping in view the steps given by DeVellis (2017). These are i. Define construct, ii. Generate item pools, iii. Determine the format, iv. Expert review, v. considers the inclusion of validated items, vi. Administer items to a development scale vii. Evaluate items and viii. Optimize scale length. For this purpose, an item development framework was developed stating indicators of all the five sub-constructs in the SPACE Model (Situational Awareness, Presence, Authenticity, Clarity, and Empathy). Result Initially, 54 items were developed using a literature review. These items were given to nine experts in the field. These experts included psychologists and teachers. They rated all items on three points Likert Scale, as aligned, partially aligned, and not aligned. After their responses three items were deleted so, the remaining items were 51. The content validity index calculated as per the universal agreement method is .94 which is excellent (Rodrigues, Adachi, Beattie & McDermid, 2017). These 51 items scale was distributed among 200 teachers. The scale was passed through rigorous testing for reliability and the final scale has 37 items with .884 Cronbach Alpha. Items that did not contribute to reliability were excluded from the scale. Inter-item correlation shows the coherence of each item with the rest of the scale. The inter-item correlation ranged from .53 to .76 and which means the scale was not unidimensional (Leech, Barrett & Morgan, 2015). Factor analysis was carried out to know the latent variables in the scale. Only those items were retained that have a Eugene value of 1. The sample frequency test- the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure was .926. This is greater than .70, indicating sufficient items for each factor (Leech, Barrett & Morgan, 2015). The value of Bartlett’s Test of sphericity was significant with an alpha value of .0001 (<.05) indicating that there was a correlation between items (Leech, Barrett & Morgan, 2015). All communalities’ values were greater than .30. Details of items number and reliability of social intelligence are as follows:

9 Table 1 Reliability Coefficient of Social Intelligence Scale No. of Items Cronbach Alpha 37 .88 Table 1 shows that the final scale consists of 37 items with a reliability coefficient value of .88. The five sub-constructs of social intelligence were also subjected to reliability testing. Details of the reliability of sub-scales are given in table 2. Table 2 Reliability of Sub-Scales of Social Intelligence Scale No Construct Number of Items Cronbach Alpha 1 Situational Awareness 11 .804 2 Presence 5 .770 3 Authenticity 5 .671 4 Clarity 10 .739 5 Empathy 6 .743 Table 2 indicates the values of the coefficient of alpha reliability for sub-scales of social intelligence. It is clear from Tables 1 & 2 that the social intelligence scale is reliable. According to Devellis (2017), Rothbard & Edward (2003), McAllisterm & Bigley (2003) & Nunnaly (1978) states that reliabilities exceeding .70 are acceptable. Discussion The scale was developed to measure the social intelligence of school teachers. Social intelligence is very important for teachers in teaching social and emotional learning to students (Afzal & Afzal, 2021). The sample contained an equal number of male and female teachers. Inter-item correlation was between .53 to .76 with reliability .88 for overall scale and .671 to .804 for sub-scales. The lowest reliability is for sub-scale authenticity with .671 but is in the acceptable range (Rothbard & Edward, 2003). Moreover, the number of items for authenticity is 5. When the number of items decreases, reliability is likely to decrease s (Dennick & Tavakol, 2011; Cortina, 1993). The researchers recommend a more diverse large sample for improving reliability. References Afzal, M., Afzal, M.A. (2021). Development and Validation of Teacher’s Social Emotional Teaching Competence Questionnaire (SETCQ) for School Teachers. International Review of Social Sciences. V.9 (1). Retrieved from https://irss.academyirmbr.com/papers/1611562552.pdf dated August 28, 2022.

10 Arif, S., Mujtaba, B. G., Afzal, T. (2012). Stress, Task, and Relationship Orientations: Analysis Across Two Culturally Diverse Countries. International Business and Management, 4(2), 33-40. Available from: URL: http://www.cscanada. net/index.php/IBM/article/view/j.ibm.1923842820120402.1140 retrieved June 22, 2021. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3968/j.ibm.1923842820120402.1140. Cacioppo, J., & Berntson, G. (2009). In Search of the Social Brain. The American Journal of Psychology. 122(4). 547-550. Cortina, J. M. (1993). What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(1), 98104. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021- 9010.78.1.98 Darling-Hammond, L. (2013). Getting Teacher Evaluation Right. What Really Matter for Effectiveness and Improvement. New York. Teacher College Press. Dennick, R., & Tavakol, M. (2011). Making Sense of Cronbach’s Alpha. International Journal of Medical Association. 2:53-55 DeVellis, R.F. (2017). Scale Development: Theory and Application. Sage Publication. Goleman, D. (2006). Social Intelligence: The New Science of Human Relationship. Bantam Dell, New York. Hinchey, P.H. (2010). Getting Teacher Assessment Right: What Policy Makers Can Learn from Research. Boulder co. National Education Policy. Hunt, T. (1928). The Measurement of Social Intelligence. Journal of Applied Psychology. Col.12(3). Pp.317-334. Jensen, E. (2000). Brain-based learning: The new science of teaching & training. San Diego, CA: The Brain Store. Karl, A. (2006). Social Intelligence: The New Science of Human Success. Jossey Bass. Korzybski, A. (1933). Science and Sanity: An Introduction to Non-Verbal and general Semantic. Colonial Press. Cambridge. Kroeber, A. L., & Kluckhohn, C. (1952). Culture: a critical review of concepts and definitions. Papers. Peabody Museum of Archaeology & Ethnology, Harvard University, 47(1), viii, 223. Kyriakids, L., Cambell, R.J., & Christofidu, E. (2002). Generating Criteria for Measuring Teacher Effectiveness through Self-Report: A Complementary Way of Measuring Teacher Effectiveness. Journal of Classroom Interaction. 40(2). Pp.44-66. Leech, N.L., Barrett, K.C., & Morgan, G.A. (2005). IBM SPSS for Intermediate Statistics: Use and Interpretation. Routledge. New York. LeDoux, J. (2008). Remembrance of emotions past: The brain and learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

11 Little, O., Geo, L., & Bell, C. (2009). A Practical Guide to Evaluating Teacher effectiveness. National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality. McAllisterm D.J., & Bigley, G.A. (2002). Work Context and the Definition of Self. How Organizational Care Influences Organization Based Self Esteem. Academy of Management Journal. Vol.45. issue.5.pp-894-904 McQuade, J. (2013). The Social Intelligence of Principals: Links to Teachers’ Continuous Improvement. Retrieved from https://digitalcommons.lesley.edu/education_dissertations/62 dated June 22, 2021. Nunnaly, J. (1978). Psychometric Theory. New York. McGraw-Hill. Rapheal, J., & Paul, V. (2017). Explaining the Relationship Between Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction and Emotional Intelligence. Guru General of Behavioral and Social Sciences, 5(2), 662-671. Rodrigues, I. S., Adachi, J. D., Beattie, K. A., & Macdermide, J. C. (2017). Development and Validation of a New Tool to Measure the Facilitators, Barriers, and Preferences to Exercise in People with Osteoporosis. BioMed Central. Rothbard, N.P., & Edward, J. R. (2003). Investment in Work and Family roles: A Test of Identity and Utilitarian Motives. Personnel Psychology. 56.699-729. Sharma, R. (2012). Measuring Social and Emotional Competencies in Indian Context. Cross Culture Management: An International Journal. Vol.19 (1). Pp 30-47. Thorndike, R.L & Saul, S. (1937). An Evaluation of the Attempts to Measure Social Intelligence. The Psychological Bulletin. Vol.34(5). Weis, S. (2008). Theory and Measurement of Social Intelligence as a Cognitive Performance Construct. Doctoral dissertation. Otto-von-Guericke-University Magdeburg, Germany.

12 PER 02-01-22 Exploring the Heads’ Leadership Practices on Four Dimensions of Distributed Leadership in Islamabad Capital Territory Dr Maqsood Ahmed* Dr Munazza Ambreen** Dr Ishtiaq Hussain*** Abstract A qualitative study was conducted to explore the extent of heads’ distributed leadership practices in Islamabad Model Schools, Islamabad. The heads of ten selected institutions (5 females and 5 males) of different levels, from Islamabad Capital Territory were interviewed, through semi structured interview, about their distributed leadership practices in the school contexts, including what distributed leadership means to them, how it is practiced in schools and how parents, teachers and students are engaged in leadership affair. The data collected from heads were coded according to common themes. Although carried on a small scale, this qualitative study will probably establish a firm basis for the future studies to explore the distributed leadership practices in the schools of Pakistan. The study discovered the traces of distributed leadership practices in the institutions and it was revealed that the term distributed leadership was new for the respondents but their practices were closely linked to the distributed leadership practices. They emphasized upon the importance of development and communication of a common vision for the stake holders. The participants viewed the need of formal structure for teachers so that they can participate in leadership roles of the institution. Keywords – leadership practices, shared responsibility, mission, vision & goals; school culture, distributed leadership _______________________________________________________________________________________________________ *Vice Principal, Islamabad Model College for Boys, Street 17 Sector I-10/1, Islamabad, Pakistan Email: [email protected] (Corresponding Author) **Assistant Professor, Secondary Teacher Education Department, Allama Iqbal Open University, Islamabad, Pakistan. Email: [email protected] ***Professor/Chairman, Department of Education & Psychology, Kohat University of Science & Technology, Kohat, Pakistan. Email: [email protected]

13 Introduction In the previous years when the structure of the educational organizations was not so complex and the expectations from school heads were also not so high, the principal (head teacher) only performed administrative or managerial duties. Friedman (2002) believed in complexity of school leaders’ job in present era. Role of secondary school head is very demanding due to variety of functions and tasks associated with the job (Nhundu, 1999). Schools are complex organizations; on the reason that several donor agencies/ nongovernmental organizations have their interests in educational institutions. There is increased awareness among masses about nature and quality of education provided in the institutions. Government has introduced reforms to uplift the standard and quality of education in federation and in provinces e.g. Prime Minister’s Education Sector Reforms in ICT and Education sector reforms in Punjab, KPK and other provinces. Socially different issues have affected the educational institutions directly e.g. terrorists’ attacks on educational institutions, moreover the role of media cannot be denied. In all these circumstances, the role of educational administrators and heads have become increasingly demanding. These factors have greatly affected the performance and functioning of schools and demand more effective roles from head teachers to be played to ensure quality of education. National Education Policy 2009 lays emphasis on quality of education to be imparted to citizen of Pakistan. In these circumstances, expectation from one individual that he would possess expertise, skills and time to take leadership role of the school all alone, would be futile. The better solution and demand is to share the leadership roles with teachers. The facts discussed above disclose that collaboration of head with many leaders with in the school is need of hour. Involvement of teachers in schools’ decision-making matters would result in better administration of school. So, the Problem highlighted is that with increase in complexity in organizations, it has become evident that no one individual leader will be able to run the institutions with his/her personal skills, knowledge and abilities, but he/she has to distribute leadership functions among multiple leaders (Burke, Fiore, & Salas, 2003; Pearce & Sims, 2000). Hence, the nature of leadership has been changed from a single man show to a social process, which demands participation and cooperation between team members and team leader (Pearce et al., 2009). Keeping in view the reports of governmental and nongovernmental organizations regarding plight of educational institutions and deteriorating standard of our education system the proposed project draws the attention towards needed improvement in the functioning of educational institutions, which include the complex role of head of institution in this modern era. It is a fact that, different social, political and departmental factors make the task of head more complex and demand collaboration of staff members with head in school matters to succeed and achieve educational objectives. Alone head cannot be expected to lead different dimensions of the school. Expertise and capability of a single person is limited as compared to joint wisdom and team work. Taking into consideration the scenario of Pakistani educational institutions, there is dire need to explore distributed leadership practices of heads in the school environment. So, the qualitative study intends to explore the level to which the heads in Islamabad Model Schools use the distributed leadership practices in their institutions. Objectives of the study The following objectives guided the study:

14 i. To explore the extent to which the heads in Islamabad Model Schools use the distributed leadership practices in schools. ii. To discover heads’ views about distributed leadership. iii. To study how school heads engage teachers, parents and students in leadership affairs. Review of related literature Distributed leadership Distributed leadership is defined as a leadership phenomenon in which leadership functions are not handled by one individual but shared among several people in an organization or team (Storey, 2004; Yukl, 2002). Distributed leadership Practice is a leadership practice that gets benefit from the combined expertise available and utilizes multiple sources of guidance and direction. This form of leadership joins the efforts , expertise and capabilities of different actors working in school and utilizes their mutual interactions, keeps in view the situation in hand; in this way through collaboration abilities of team members are pooled and results are much better than individual efforts and even sum of individual actions (Elmore, 2000; Gronn, 2000; Spillane et al., 2001) the reason behind is interaction and synergy among different stake holders of the school. In 1951 for the first time Jack R. Gibb used the term distributed leadership in his book Dynamics of Participative Groups (Lucia, 2004). Gibb explains that there is no one leader, the leadership is distributed. He lays maximum emphasis upon the growth and development of all the members of the group because they have to take up leadership role (Gibb, 1951). Only through continuous development the members can perform and participate in leadership functions of school. The term has been shadowed under terminology of “teacher leadership” and “shared decision making” since that time (Lucia, 2004). The term “distributed leadership” resurfaced in the 1990s with Richard Elmore through his new concept of distributed leadership, which called for leaders to delegate responsibilities among various groups in the organization while working toward common values, culture, symbols and rituals (Lucia). The distributed leadership model encompasses the leadership team working on a shared goal, which results in greater advantage of organizational change (Storey, 2004; Yukl, 2002). Integration of actions of multiple group of individuals are involved in distributed leadership to lead the school towards change process (Spillane, Halverson & Diamond, 2001) Dimensions of Distributed Leadership As per Elmore’s Conceptual Framework (2000) which was later on modified by Gordon in 2005, distributed leadership comprises the following dimensions. Mission, Vision and Goals While discussing the dimensions of distributed leadership many writers and researchers have considered mission, vision and goals as a prominent dimension. As explained by DuFour and Eaker (1998) mission is purpose of organization, whereas vision gives a direction to the organization. Moreover, these are building blocks of any professional learning community. Neuman and Simmons (2000) clarify that in case of shared vision, clear goals are disseminated to the members of the school main aim is students’ achievement. School vision is important as it acts like an educational platform where the beliefs of the organization produce the organization’s norms (Gordon, 2005). Contradictory goals or vision adopted by members of the organization may resist the progress and change, especially in case of

15 distributed leadership. In his study Storey (2004) reported that lack of shared mission vision and goal in schools was cause of students’ demotivation and teachers’ conflicting priorities. School Culture It takes a long time to form culture of the school, beliefs, values and habits of the organization are linked with school culture, these elements form school culture (Gordon, 2005). A culture in schools, developed through encouragement of teachers to collaborate and participate in school based decision making, and the engagement of teachers in professional development to strengthen the leadership skills of classroom teacher, is very much supportive to distributed leadership (Murphy, 2005). School cultures will change as an added benefit if the organization follows a common purpose, understands the change process, develops relationships among staff members, fosters knowledge building and strives for consistency (Fullan, 2001). Leadership Practices Leadership practices as defined by (Gordon, 2005) were “how school leaders define, present, and carry out their interaction with others in the process of leading”. Leadership practices offer deliberations and insights into actions of school leaders, which they perform and routines, which they carry out, within the structure of the school (Spillane, Halveson & Diamond, 2004). Leadership practices serve the purpose to examine the functions as: (a) list of activities to perform a task, (b) the persons responsible to perform the task, (c) necessary arrangements, resources and material required, (d) what type of goals are to be achieved (Spillane, 2006). Shared Responsibility Distributed leadership can be taken in terms of shared responsibility because the notion of single heroic leader, prevalent in the past, is going to be replaced by a concept of leadership that is a shared process of many people utilizing their collective capacity to accomplish the task (Yukl, 2002). Shared responsibility proposes the idea of sharing the responsibilities of leadership functions by many members of the school and responsibility should not be on the shoulder of head only (Storey, 2004). Professional development of the members to take up the leadership roles is also necessary so that they may learn, grow and perform functions efficiently (Gordon, 2005). DuFour and Eaker (1998) in discussing professional development relate that through training and professional development the persons become more effective in supporting students to learn. Research Methodology Semi-structured face-to-face interviews were conducted to collect the data and explore the views of participants. The interview questions were developed through thorough study of related material on the subject. May (1997) records that “it is quality of interviews that result in rich insights into people’s experiences, opinions, aspirations, attitudes and feelings” (p.108). The interview as a data collection tool was selected in this study because the aim was to explore the perceptions of heads about distributed leadership practices and its dimensions. Robson (2000) narrated that the semi-structured interview is more suitable for exploration as it has already framed and sequenced questions and their order can be changed by interviewer as per the situation and understanding of the interviewee. Another advantage of semistructured interviews was highlighted by Denscombe (2003). In a semi-structured interview, the interviewee is at liberty to develop ideas and speak more widely on the areas asked by the researcher. In it the questions and answers are open-ended so a variety of information and

16 point of view can be gathered by the researcher. The interviewer can change the wording of question as per needs of a particular interviewees. Another advantage of interviews was its face to face component, in which gestures, body language and facial expressions help a lot in comprehending the answer of interviewee and thus a deep information is gained with minute details. Although conduct of interview is an arduous task and requires expertise on the part of interviewer, yet in interview a simple equipment for recording is required, for example in this study the researcher used mobile phone for recording the interviews. Date and time of the interviews were fixed in consultation with head teachers. The venue of interviews were offices of the heads in their respective schools. To facilitate the data analysis, the recording of the interview was converted into word by word transcription. Participants Total 10 heads (5 male and 5 female) of Islamabad Model Schools in Islamabad Capital Territory (ICT) were included in the study. Data Analysis Qualitative data analysis as defined by Miles and Huberman (1994) comprise three concurrent activities i.e. data reduction, data display and conclusion/ verification (p.10). The researcher adopted this approach to analyze the interview data. In the Miles and Huberman analysis, data reduction includes different processes i.e. selecting, focusing, simplifying and transforming the data. It organizes the data in such a manner that conclusions can be extracted and verified. The thematic approach to data analysis was adopted and the interview data on the transcripts were coded according to common themes. It helped to identify views and themes emerged out of interview. common themes were recorded on a matrix. Quotations from the interviewees were appended to support and elaborate each theme and area emerged. As per Miles and Huberman (1994), information gathered from interview is organized and compressed in data display, which facilitates conclusion drawing, the last step of data analysis. Presentation of Findings and Discussions Open-ended questions in the interviews were very useful because they provided in-depth information related to heads’ views about distributed leadership practices and its dimensions. To present some interesting views of the heads’ comments some quotations were also added. It was not possible to mention views of all the heads so only most significant views, which highlighted the distributed leadership practices in the institutions, were quoted. The second researcher examined the same data to validate the categories emerged out of interview data. Findings of the study are presented below as per common themes. Distributed leadership In response to the interview questions, the head teachers in the study explained the term distributed leadership, as per their understanding and in different ways but it was noted that some of them expressed it in terms of their practices in the school and others in terms of administrative structure of the school. The former group of heads pointed out that distributed leadership is about empowering the staff member to participate in leadership matters of the school. They were of the opinion that teachers may be encouraged and groomed to take leadership roles and make decisions. One head teachers’ remarks can be quoted to elaborate

17 the ideas of group who believe distributed leadership in terms of what it does or what functions are related to it: “…I think distributed leadership means distributing responsibilities so that teachers feel part of the institution and they may have an opportunity to make decisions” Another participant demonstrated a wider opinion of distributed leadership in the quotation stated below: “When we empower the teachers and members to engage in leadership functions of the school, we are applying distributed leadership. It’s about delegating the powers to make decisions, giving them liberty to implement their decisions through actions and carry them through. But the other side is also important i.e. accountability, in distributing the leadership we also distribute accountability.” One interviewee remarked with smile: “Through distribution of tasks and responsibilities, we as head teachers share and less our burden. Moreover, teachers feel proud that they are part of administration.” Another head teacher vocalized that in distributed leadership we make people answerable because if there is no accountability, people simply would neither take interest in school matters nor discharge their duties efficiently so the results would not be better. This suggests that accountability in distributed leadership has two aspects; firstly the teachers’ motivation so that they utilize their best abilities to achieve school goals, secondly, it gives the teachers a sense of ownership. The other group of head teachers explained the structure of school organization to explain distributed leadership. The hierarchy starts from the head at top, then middle leaders and at the bottom classroom teachers. They also talked about different teams working in the school to perform specific tasks in the school. The heads expressed that in their schools’ teachers work in teams, there are different committees to perform specific functions. In the schools, the teams and committees are given the authority to make decisions and perform certain roles. The following quotation can be quoted as an example of how distributed leadership was articulated in terms of leadership structure: One head teacher echoed that “Keeping formal hierarchical structure intact, distribution of leadership to teams and committees results in a shared structure in her school. She stressed that by distributing responsibilities to teams, everybody in school knows, what is going on in the school, as there is organized mechanism of staff meetings, where the matters are discussed with staff.” She added, “…when everybody has something to say and something to do for institution so it isn’t one leader leading at the top and implementing his/her ideas”. She summed up her view of distributed leadership as follows:

18 “Distributed leadership is a shared vision and shared responsibility, when you and your all staff members are at the same page, the share their ideas and participate in school matters, your burden is lessen and you are supported. The people involved in decision making own the decisions and support in the implementation phase of the decisions.” The main ideas of head teachers in the form of definitions of distributed leadership can be concluded as distributed leadership is name of sharing responsibilities in school, its team work, its being accountable and making others accountable, its giving powers to other members and encouraging others to participate in decision making, its professional development of staff and giving them a sense of ownership. Mission, vision and goals The heads views regarding mission, vision and goals, the first dimension of distributed leadership, reflect that schools of Islamabad capital Territory possess mission, vision and goals in varying degrees. It is one aspect of distributed leadership and its requirement, as explained by DuFour and Eaker (1998) mission is purpose of organization, whereas vision gives a direction to the organization. Moreover, these are building blocks of any professional learning community (Smith, 2007). One of the heads remarked “we have set the vision of the school in consultation with the staff members. They all know it and we have displayed it prominently” The focus of distributed leadership in educational institutions is student learning. For this purpose, a shared mission and vision, with significant goal is developed (Neuman & Simon, 2000). As per heads, the school goals are established by the collaborative endeavor of head teacher and teachers so they can clearly state, understand and describe the school goals. one head teacher echoed: “My teachers not only know about mission statement but try to achieve the goal of school keeping in view the mission.” told one respondent.” Vision of any school act as an educational platform that reflects school’s beliefs about its aims, activities, and school climate. It trains people in such a way that the behavioral norms of the organization are set (Gordon, 2005). Although mission, vision, and goals is important but the important aspect of mission, vision and goals is that it must be clear in the minds of all stake holders, they must be aware of the mission vision and goals of school (Gordon, 2005). While conducting interviews, it was revealed that the heads were not sure about the status of parents and students regarding their awareness about school goals. One interviewee stated: “Simply cannot say about the students’ knowledge and understanding about school’s mission vision and goals. In fact, we have to convey these things in their language and at their level” Another head narrated as follows: “Some of the parents are well aware about the school goals but most of them are not aware, although they are concerned about the activities of their children”

19 For school’s success it is important to have a comprehensive vision which integrates beliefs about meeting the desired goals (Marks & Printy, 2006). With involvement of parents and students as important stakeholders, reaching the set goals of the school would be a dream. So their awareness and contribution in school’s mission, vision and goals is important. School Culture The second dimension of distributed leadership, school culture (Elmore, 2000), ensures the cooperation among head teachers, teachers, parents and community and encourage the joint working of all the stake holders for a common purpose. school culture comprises the beliefs, values and norms of the school (Sergiovanni & Starratt, 2007). Hence, distributed leadership requires a common school culture. Harris believes that distributed leadership utilizes more than one sources of guidance and direction, having their own expertise and they are united through a common culture (Harris, 2005, p. 67 cited in Robinson, 2009). Heads highlighted that activities related to beliefs, values and norms are practiced in their schools which help them to cultivate lively school culture. They believe that there mutual respect, understanding and cooperation among heads and teachers. One head teacher remarked “In my school there are good relations among teaching and non-teaching staff, moreover all respect each other, give value to others’ opinion.” “Teachers help each other in academic and administrative matters, school culture is very healthy and caring” one female head narrated. Most of the heads remarked that the teachers are encouraged to take part in leadership matters and their ideas on school management issues are given weightage. Another head on the contrary stated as follows: “Although in our school an atmosphere of harmony is seen yet a few teachers are reluctant to use new ideas and innovations. I and my other colleagues continually try to convince them.” School cultures will change as an added benefit if the organization follows a common purpose, understands the change process, develops relationships among staff members, fosters knowledge building and strives for consistency (Fullan, 2001). Shared Responsibility The third dimension, shared responsibility among staff members is also encouraged by distributed leadership. Shared responsibility proposes the idea of sharing the responsibilities of leadership functions by many members of the school and responsibility should not be on the shoulder of head only (Storey, 2004). The heads viewed that the parents share responsibilities for students’ academic performance and school administration works in close collaboration with parents and community. As viewed by a participant “Schools can progress rapidly when all the stake holders i.e. head, teachers, students and parents carry through their responsibilities in collaboration with each other” Elmore (2000) proposes, the responsibilities should be assigned as per interests, skills, experience and areas of expertise of the members. Suitable positions may be formed

20 to organize the individuals so that they can complement each other and cooperate with each other. The same quality was found among the heads. For example, one interviewee remarked: “I work on division of labour principle in my school, I distribute the tasks according to potential and ability of teachers. They show better results” Phillips (2003) suggests that students’ achievement is linked with the sharing of tasks. It enhances with the sharing of responsibilities among stake holders. Furthermore, there is good communication between parents and teachers in parentteacher meeting, which augments the development of shared responsibility in the schools. “I have observed that in my school, parents and teachers discuss the performance of students and the ways in which it can be improved. In fact, they realize their role and responsibility” However, a few heads added that they lack time to collaborate on instructional issues in their schools and there is no formal structure to provide teachers opportunities to participate in decision-making. Two heads remarked that there is no formal mechanism to involve the teachers in leadership affairs, mean no policy, all that is done is personal understanding and ability. Leadership Practices Leadership practices, the fourth dimension of distributed leadership, include the activities of leaders to organize staff and make them more productive. Distributed leadership practices result in the cooperation of staff members, which consequently ends with more production. Leadership practices give a clear understanding of how the school heads take actions in the school and carry out routines to run the matters of school with in formal structure (Spillane et al., 2004). However, the scope of leadership practices and distribution is not limited to the walls of school, when the expertise, skills and ideas within the organization are not sufficient to solve the problem, then leadership practices demand that knowledge and skills may be sought outside the organization (Christy, 2008). Most of the heads remarked that they have arranged professional development programmes in their schools to train the staff to take leadership roles. These programmes are in alignment with the mission, vision and goals of schools and head office also; moreover, provide competent staff with effective leadership qualities, who join hand in hand and support the head to achieve school goals (Copland, 2003). One participant narrated that “In schools teachers like to take interest and take part in leadership roles for the betterment of the institution though they have shortage of time and resources due to academic tasks (their primary responsibility) for meaningful contribution to leadership”. Sheppard (2003) explains that school leadership may be distributed among formal and informal leaders to realize school goals. Informal leaders are teachers who take leadership roles. Interestingly, one head remarked: “it is common practice in schools that the teachers who work hard and show responsibility, more tasks are given to them. Which results in shortage of time to complete different tasks.”

21 The problem highlighted by the head is common and needs attention by the formal leaders. “Tasks are assigned but resources are not allocated, end result is collapse” Responsibility and authority go hand by hand. Responsibility without authority is of no use. Conclusions The following conclusions were drawn from findings of the study: 1. The present study found that heads practice distributed leadership practices in their schools. 2. As per heads’ views, the school goals are established as a joint venture of head teacher and teachers so they are well aware and can clearly state, understand and describe the school goals. 3. About the involvement and understanding of parents and students regarding the school goals, the participants were not sure. 4. Greater degree of mutual respect and understanding among heads and teachers was informed by the heads. 5. The teachers are encouraged to participate in leadership tasks and instructional decision-making. 6. The heads viewed that parents share responsibilities for students’ academic performance and school administration works in close collaboration with parents and community. 7. In parent-teacher meetings, sharing of ideas and communication between parents and teachers was reported by the participants, which reflects the shared responsibility in school. 8. Teachers also take interest to take part in leadership roles, despite scarcity of time and resources to contribute towards leadership functions in the school. Recommendations The following recommendations are forwarded on the basis of findings and conclusions of the study: 1. Heads of the institutions should make use of teachers’ skills in the schools in a mutual way and build their capacity for further success. For this purpose, training is proposed for the capacity building of head teachers and teachers in the areas of distributed leadership. 2. School leaders may publish magazine and newsletters highlighting mission, vision and goals of schools for awareness of parents and students, hold community-based meetings or functions or convey the same during parents-teachers meeting. Most modern way is to launch institutions’ website with valuable information on it for awareness of parents, students and community. 3. Head should manage time and allocate resources for teachers to contribute to leadership roles which could enhance school success. For example, the teachers given leadership roles may be compensated in allocation of classes, so that they find extra time to perform managerial tasks. 4. The need of formal structure to provide teachers with ample opportunities to participate in leadership roles was viewed as urgent by the participants. So, policy

22 level changes are recommended to implement the distributed leadership practices in institutions. 5. The results of this study are solely from heads’ perspectives, the future researchers should include teachers, parents, and students in future studies. References Burke, C. S., Fiore, S. M., & Salas, E. (2003). The role of shared cognition in enabling shared leadership and team adaptability. In C. L. Pearce & J. A. Conger (Eds.), Shared leadership: Reframing the hows and whys of leadership (pp. 103–122). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Christy, K. M. J. (2008). A comparison of distributed readiness in elementary and middle schools. Doctoral Dissertation Presented at the Faculty of the Graduate School at the University of Missouri. Copland, M. A. (2003). Leadership of inquiry: Building and sustaining capacity for school improvement. Educational evaluation and policy analysis, 25(4), 375-395. Denscombe, M. (2003) The Good Research Guide for Small Scale Social Research Projects. 2nd Edition. Open University Press. DuFour, R., & Eaker, R. (1998). Professional learning communities at work: Best practices for enhancing student achievement. Bloomington, IN: National Education Service. Elmore, R. F. (2000). Building a new structure for school leadership. Washington DC: The Albert Shanker Institute. Friedman, I.A. 2002. Burnout in school principals: Role related antecedents. Social Psychology of Education 5: 229–51. Fullan, M. (2001) The New Meaning of Educational Change. Teachers College Press. London and New York. Gibb, J.R. (1951). Dynamics of Participative Groups. John S. Swift Company: New York. Gordon, Z. (2005). The effect of distributed leadership on student achievement (Doctoral Dissertation, Central Connecticut State University, 2005). Gronn, P. (2000) “Distributed properties: a new architecture for leadership,” Educational Management and Administration, 28 (3) pp 317-338. Harris, A. (2005). Leading or misleading? Distributed leadership and school improvement. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 37(3), 255–265. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00220270500038602 Lucia, R. T. (2004). Distributed leadership: An exploratory study. (Doctoral Dissertation, Florida Atlantic University, 2004). Dissertation Abstracts International, AAT3159315. May, T. (1997) Social Research. Issues, Methods and Process. 2nd Edition: Open University Press. Buckingham Philadelphia. Miles, M.B. and Huberman, A. M. (1994) Qualitative Data Analysis, London: Sage Publications Limited. Murphy, J. (2005). Connecting teacher leadership and school improvement. (1st edition). Corwin Press: Thousand Oaks, California. Neuman, M., & Simmons, W. (2000). Leadership for student learning. Phi Delta Kappan, 82, 9-13. Nhundu, T.J. (1999). Determinants and prevalence of occupational stress among Zimbabwean school administrators. Journal of Educational Administration 37: 256–72. Pearce, C. L., & Sims, H. P., Jr. (2000). Shared leadership: Toward a multilevel theory of leadership. Advances in the Interdisciplinary Studies of Work Teams, 7, 115–139. Pearce, C. L., Manz, C. C., & Sims, H. P., Jr. (2009). Where do we go from here? Is shared leadership the key to team success? Organizational Dynamics,38, 234–238.

23 Phillips, J. (2003). Powerful learning: Creating learning communities in urban school reform. Journal of curriculum and Supervision, 18(3), 240-258. Printy, S. M., & Marks, H. M. (2006). Shared leadership for teacher and student learning. Theory into Practice, 45(2), 125-132. Robinson, V. M. J. (2009). Fit for purpose: An educationally relevant account of distributed leadership. In A. Harris (Ed.), Distributed Leadership, Studies in Educational Leadership 7. Springer. Robson, C. (2000) Real World Research: 2nd Edition. Blackwell Publishers Ltd Sergiovanni, T. J., & Starratt, R. J. (2007). Supervision: A redefinition (8th ed.). Boston, MA: McGrawHill. Sheppard, B. (2003). Leadership, Organizational Learning, and the Successful Integration of Information and Communication Technology in Teaching and Learning, 7 (14). IEJLL: International Electronic Journal for Leadership in Learning, 7. Smith, M. L. (2007). A study of teacher engagement in four dimensions of distributed leadership in one school district in Georgia. Doctoral Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Georgia Southern University. Statesboro, Georgia. Spillane, J. P. (2006). Distributed leadership. (1st ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Leadership Library in Education. Spillane, J. P., Halverson, R., & Diamond, J. B. (2001). Investigating school leadership practice: A distributed perspective. Educational Researcher, 23-28. Spillane, J. P., Halverson, R., & Diamond, J. B. (2004). Towards a theory of leadership practice: A distributed perspective. Journal of Curriculum Studies 36 (1), 3-34. Spillane, J., Halverson, R. and Diamond, J. (2001) Towards a Theory of Leadership Practice: a distributed perspective. North-Western University, Institute of Policy Research Working Article. Spillane, J.P., Halverson, R. and Diamond, J. B. (2001) Investigating School Leadership Practice: a distributed perspective. Educational Researcher, 30 (2) pp 311-338. Storey, A. (2004) “The Problem of Distributed Leadership in Schools” Leadership and Management, 24 (3) pp 249-265. Yukl, G. (2002). Leadership in Organizations (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NY:Prentice Hall.

24 PER 03-01-22 Evaluation of Mathematics Question Papers Administered by the Federal Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education (FBISE), Islamabad:Using Item Analysis and Reliability Assistant Professor, Shahzad Ahmad Federal College of Education, H-9, Islamabad. E-mail: [email protected] Research Assistant, Momna Ahmad Qureshi Federal College of Education, H-9, Islamabad. E-mail: [email protected] Research Associate, Sadia Jamil Federal College of Education, H-9, Islamabad. E-mail: [email protected] Abstract This study was outlined to explore the evaluation of mathematics question papers administered by the FBISE. In this study, a sample of 200 female students was collected from 4 secondary schools of Islamabad using convenient sampling. The present study was delimited to public high schools in Islamabad under the administrative control of Federal Directorate of Education (FDE) in urban-II and is further delimited for grade 10th science students. In this study 5 years, past papers were used in which a total of 75 items were present. Similar items and ones with the same degree of cognition were removed from the 75 Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs.). A total of 50 items were chosen for the final draft. Based on findings, the researcher was left with 31 items after considering item difficulty, discrimination power, and distractor analysis.

25 The reliability of the 5 years past mathematics papers was determined using the Kuder Richardson formula, i.e., KR-20, which is recommended for test items with varying levels of difficulty. The reliability coefficient was 0.70, indicating that the reliability of 5 years of mathematics previous papers in grade 9 was satisfactory. List of Acronyms FBISE Federal Board of Intermediate and Secondary education FDE Federal Directorate of Education IMCG Islamabad Model College for Girls IMSG Islamabad Model School for Girls Keywords: mathematics; item difficulty; discrimination power; distracter analysis; reliability. Introduction Achievement tests are tests designed to measure student achievement in an educational setting. These tests may include different number of items that can be scored dichotomously (Salkind, 2007). Puente and Garcia (2000) pointed out that achievement tests are always widely used in many contexts. The primary purpose of the achievement tests is to measure students’ competencies in a specified content area. Students' knowledge and abilities will be measured by these instruments (Hanif et al., 2017). Academic success in mathematics appears to be one of the predictors of student attainment in their careers. Success in mathematics is important for understanding how society works. Mathematics is playing an important role in our daily life. In the current educational scenario, it is

26 imperative to provide a high-quality professional development program in mathematics and science (Blank, Alas & Smith, 2007). Mathematics as an important subject in secondary education is linked to more academic and professional opportunities (Akinsola and Tella, 2003). Burton quoted in Agwagah and Usman (2003) admitted the importance of mathematics in the scientific, industrial, technological and social progress of a society. All this explains why mathematics is made compulsory in lower and upper secondary education, in Pakistan. Assessing student performance is essential in the teaching and learning process. Without this process, students, teachers, and heads will have no idea of their performance. William (2011), considered assessment as a means of evaluating a series of accomplished activities related to the teaching-learning process in terms of its usefulness. Pandra, Sugiman, and Mardapi (2017) noted that assessment of learning outcomes should motivate and condition students and teachers as feedback can provide them with relevant data. Thus, assessment is vital and an essential part of teaching (Khoshaim & Rashid, 2016; Sural, 2016). Testing students is one of the means of assessment as it measures their level of knowledge and skills acquired. Tests are the known instruments for assessing students' learning ability, performance, and academic achievement (Hanif, Khan, Masroor, & Amjad, 2017). According to Quaigrain and Arhin (2017), tests are meant for determining a student's knowledge of something. Therefore, it is necessary to accept some standardized assessment and scoring procedures, confirming the quality of the test constructed. Thus, as an assessment tool for obtaining data on learner development, the quality of testing should be well aligned with the specified curriculum which takes into account both basic and core competencies for this will be used to improve the current learning system (Pandra, Sugiman & Mardapi, 2017).

27 Assessment is critical in the development of students' performance. These are also used to judge whether or not a pupil is ready to advance a grade (Borghouts, Slingerland, & Haerens, 2017). Traditional assessment refers to standardized testing in which pupils choose an answer from a list of possibilities. The most often used traditional evaluation instruments are multiple-choice exams, True/False tests, and short-answer tests. One or more starting statements are followed by a list of two or more suggested responses on multiple-choice examinations. They are extensively used by teachers, schools, and assessment organizations because they are cost-effective, objective, and straightforward to score (Bailey, 1998). True/False questions require students to choose between two options and identify which is right. They are easy to score and administer. Guessing, on the other hand, has been shown to increase your odds of success by 50% (Simonson, 2000). Short-answer test items are written as direct queries that require the student to fill in a word or phrase or as statements with a blank space for a brief written response (Simonson, 2000). We may investigate item qualities and improve test quality by using item analysis (Gronlund, 1998). Item revision allows us to spot things that are too difficult or too easy, items that do not distinguish between pupils who have assimilated the material and those who have not, and questions with implausible distractors. Teachers can then remove these nondiscrimination items from the pool, update the things, or adjust the teaching to explain any misunderstandings about the material or change how they teach. (Lange, Lehmann, and Mehrens, 1967). Purpose of the Study The preparation of question papers by subject instructors at the institutional and board levels is one of the most important activities. To develop question papers on a scientific basis, paper setters must have a good understanding and skill set in assessment design. This study

28 examines how question papers are graded in terms of basic test item production concepts, as well as how closely FBISE question papers in the mathematics subject adhere to the assessment system. The purpose of this study was to "Evaluate the Mathematics Question Papers Administered by the FBISE: Using Item Analysis and Reliability". The researcher employed reliability and item analysis to highlight some of the strengths and flaws of the FBISE mathematics question sheets. Objectives of the Study The present study involves the following research objectives: i. To check the item difficulty of different test items in mathematics at the secondary level. ii. To find out the discriminating power of different test items in mathematics at the secondary level. iii. To analyze the distractors of different test items in mathematics at the secondary level. iv. To determine the reliability of different test items of mathematics at the secondary level. Research Hypothesis The objectives of the study were further supported by the following research hypothesis: i. What is the item difficulty of mathematics question papers at the secondary level? ii. What is the discriminating power of different test items in mathematics at the secondary level? iii. What are the distractors of different test items in mathematics at the secondary level? iv. What is the reliability of different test items in mathematics at the secondary level?

29 Delimitations of the Study The present study was delimited to: secondary schools in urban-II under the administrative control of the Federal Directorate of Education (FDE), in Islamabad. grade 10th science students. Methodology The research was purely descriptive. At the secondary level, item analysis and reliability were utilized to analyze the mathematics question papers administered by the FBISE using the survey research design. The following steps were considered by the researcher for evaluating the mathematics question papers: Research Instrument To collect the research data for "Evaluation of Mathematics Question Papers Administered by the Federal Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education: Using Reliability and Item Analysis”, test items with Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs) were selected from past papers for the last 5 years. The initial draft of the Mathematics Achievement Test (MAT) was comprised of 75 test items. The researcher hired a group of subject experts for reviewing the initial draft of MAT. Based on suggestions provided by the experts, the preliminary draft of MAT was reduced to 50 test items. Test items were found identical, and ones with the same degree of cognition were removed. Administration of the Final Draft of Test Items

30 The population of the study was drawn from all of Islamabad's public secondary schools run by the FDE. The FDE activates a total of 88 secondary schools for boys and girls in Islamabad. The targeted population was taken to schools in both the I-9 and I-10 sectors of Islamabad. The current study used four governmental institutions in Islamabad as a sample. The researcher selected institutions based on a convenient sampling technique. After selecting institutions, 50 female students from each institution enrolled in mathematics in 10th grade were selected. The following institutions were selected for this purpose: Table 1 Sample in detail Sr. No Name of Institutions Number of Students 1. IMCG, I-10/4 60 2. IMSG, I-10/4 56 3. IMCG, I-9/1 40 4. IMSG, I-9/4 44 Total 200 The final draft of the test items was administrated by the researcher to 200 students of 10th grade. Initially, students were informed about the terms and conditions of the test, e.g., type of test items (MCQs), scoring criteria, and maximum time available for its administration. The researcher obtained data on students’ responses and arranged it in MS-Excel and later on used for item analysis.

31 Item Analysis Item analysis is the process of evaluating students' responses to each item to identify the item's quality. According to Amedahe & Asamoah-Gyimah (2016), it frequently stresses the item's difficulty and capacity to discriminate, as well as the effectiveness of each alternative. During the item analysis, the students' scores were ranked from highest to lowest. The intermediate group was created by deducting 30% from the top (high achievers) and 30% from the bottom (low achievers) categories. For each item, the number of examinees in the upper group who choose each response was counted, and a similar count was made for the lower group. The difficulty index, as well as the discrimination index, were calculated for each of the items. In the analysis, the effectiveness of the options that sought to analyze the distractors was also noted. Item Difficulty Item difficulty is the percentage of test takers who correctly marked the item. The difficulty value of a particular item is the percentage of a sample of people who know the answer to that item (Siri & Freddano, 2011). The difficulty index for each item can be determined as: Facility Index = = = Number of examinees who marked the item correctly =Total number of examinees It is acceptable when the value of "F" is between 0.20 and 0.90. Items are regarded easier when the value of "F" is greater than 0.90, and more difficult when the value is less than 0.20. These figures are from the International Assessment Resource (IAR), asshown in the table below

32 (see Table 2). Table 2 Evaluation of item difficulty indices for item analysis Item Difficulty Index (F) Item Evaluation F > 0.90 Item is too easy F = 0.62 Perfect value F < 0.20 Item is very difficult Source: International Assessment Resource (IAR, 2011). Discrimination Power A test items discrimination is its ability to discriminate between learners who performed well (the upper group) and those who performed poorly (the lower group). The discrimination index informs the examiner whether or not a given task exhibits differences between capable and less capable students (Amedahe & Asamoah-Gyimah, 2016). The discrimination index (D) was calculated using the following formula: Discrimination Index = D = − = Number of high achievers who marked the item correctly = Number of low achievers who marked the item correctly = Total Number of high achiever or low achiever Discrimination is 100 percent when the value of “D” is greater than 0.40, but a value of less than 0.19 shows that an object is unable to discriminate. These figures are based on data from Ebel (1972), which may be seen in the table below (see Table 3). Table 3

33 Evaluation of discrimination power indices for item analysis Item Discrimination Index (D) Item Evaluation D ≥ 0.40 Perfect items, accepted 0.30 ≤ D ≤ 0.39 Reasonably good but improvement required 0.20 ≤ D ≤ 0.29 Marginal items are usually subject to improvement D < 0.19 Poor items, rejected or required improvement through revision Source: Ebel (1972, as cited in Ovwigho, 2014) Distractor Item analysis that uses procedures similar to item difficulty and discrimination is known as distractor analysis. It's worth noting that in distractor analysis, we're less interested in how test takers select the correct answer and more interested in how the distractors can redirect test takers’ attention away from the correct answer (Crocker & Algina, 1986). The number of times each distractor is selected is recorded to determine its effectiveness. A testing expert would expect a significant number of candidates to choose the distractor for it to be successful and viable. The item difficulty and the item discrimination index can both be used to assess the effectiveness of the distractors, but the item discrimination index was used in this case to look at discrimination from a different angle. In this scenario, the concept of upper and lower groups was kept, but the analysis and expectations were slightly different from conventional item discrimination. Because more students from the lower group should choose the distractors, we should rationally predict a negative score rather than a positive number. Each distractor can have

34 itsitem discrimination value, allowing the program's effectiveness to be fine-tuned by examining how the distractors function. RELIABILITY Reliability refers to a measurement that produces consistent results with equal values (Blumberg, 2005). It assesses the consistency, precision, reproducibility, and dependability of the research (Chakrabartty, 2013). It indicates how bias-free the instrument is, ensuring consistent measurement across time and throughout the instrument's multiple components (the observed scores). Some qualitative researchers prefer to use the term dependability instead of the term reliability. It relates to how accurate and consistent the results of an evaluation instrument are. It signifies that the observed score of a measure is the same as its real value. It's necessary, but it's not enough. The term "reliability" refers to the consistency of measurements administered to the same people over time and the equivalence of groups of items from the same test (Kimberlin & Winterstein, 2008). In high-stakes situations (such as a licensure exam), reliability should be greater than 0.9, but in less important situations, 0.8 or 0.7 is acceptable. In general, dependability of better than 0.8 is considered high (Downing, 2004). The more precise the results, the more likely it is that the right research decisions will be made. Research must be dependable for it to be valid. However, trustworthiness isn't enough. Types of Reliability There are several ways for determining an instrument's dependability, including: 1. Test-Retest Reliability 2. Reliability of Parallel Forms 3. Inter-Rater Consistency

35 4. Split-Half Reliability 5. Kuder-Richardson Formulas (KR-20 & KR-21) Test-Retest Reliability Test-retest reliability refers to the consistency of scores from one test session to the next due to measurement errors. It's a measure of consistency obtained by giving a group of people the same test twice over weeks to months. By comparing the scores from Time-1 and Time-2, the test's consistency over time can be assessed. Employees of a company, for example, may be asked to complete the same employee job satisfaction questionnaire twice in three months so that test results can be compared and score stability may be determined. The test-retest reliability improves when the correlation coefficient between two sets of data is strong. Because the company's position may change during the second test, the period between the two tests should not be too long, as this would damage the research's reliability (Bland & Altman, 1986). Reliability of Parallel Forms It is a measure of consistency achieved by presenting different versions of an assessment tool to the same group of people at the same time. The results of the two versions can then be compared to see how consistent the results are with each other. The degree to which they are highly related is referred to as parallel-form reliability (DeVellis, 2006). Questionnaires, indepth interviews, and focus groups, for example, can be used to assess an organization's employee satisfaction levels, with the results being closely linked. Then we can be certain that the measures are reasonable and trustworthy (Yarnold, 2014). Inter-Rater Consistency It refers to the consistency with which data is gathered (Keyton, 2004). It establishes the equivalence of ratings received using an instrument by different observers using the same

36 instrument. When reliability is tested, no discussion is allowed. The coefficient of agreement between raters' ratings, or the correlation of scores from two or more independent raters, determines reliability. It's helpful since human observers don't always read responses the same way; raters may disagree about how well various responses or materials reflect an understanding of the constructor skill being evaluated. Split-Half Reliability To assess the degree of internal consistency, it compares one-half of the results from a set of scaled items to the other half (Ganesh, 2009). It just needs to be given once, which is especially helpful when the test is long. It's done by comparing the results of one half of a test with the results of the other half. An exam can be divided into half in a variety of ways, including the first and second halves, or even odd-numbered items. When the results of the two sides of the test are identical, the test is said to have internal reliability. It's a quick and easy way to establish trustworthiness. It's only appropriate for long surveys in which all questions assess the same concept; it's not appropriate for exams that assess many constructs (Chakrabartty, 2013). Kuder Richardson Equations (KR-20 & KR-21) KR-20 is used for a wide range of test items of varying difficulty (easy, moderate, and challenging). It should only be used if there is a correct solution for each item. It's not appropriate for a Likert scale. The KR-21 is used if all of the test items in your binary test (answering right or wrong) are equally challenging. To measure the test's reliability, the KR-20 formula is commonly employed. A KR-20 reliability coefficient of 0.70 or greater is required for a reliable score (Fraenkel, Wallen, and Hyun, 2012). − 20 = +1 2 −∑ 2 Where

37 n = total number of test items. 2 = The standard deviation squared P = percentage of people who correctly answered the questions Q = percentage of people that answered questions incorrectly − 21 = + 1 (1 − − 2 2 ) Where n = total number of test items. M = average of the test results. 2 = The standard deviation squared. Findings and Conclusions Item Analysis Item analysisis a procedure in which both students' answers and test questions are analyzed to assess the quality and quantity of the items and the test as a whole in the standardized and objective evaluation of student performances (Siri & Freddano, 2011). The item analysis is based on: 1. Item difficulty 2. Discriminating power 3. Distractors Item Difficulty

38 Each item's difficulty index can be calculated as follows: Table 4 Includes item difficulty indices of each test item Item No Item Difficulty Item No Item Difficulty Item No Item Difficulty Item No Item Difficulty Item No Item Difficulty 1. 0.77 11. 0.63 21. 0.61 31. 0.45 41. 0.28 2. 0.94 12. 0.93 22. 0.53 32. 0.68 42. 0.41 3. 0.46 13. 0.43 23. 0.46 33. 0.58 43. 0.63 4. 0.37 14. 0.64 24. 0.73 34. 0.81 44. 0.27 5. 0.83 15. 0.53 25. 0.32 35. 0.83 45. 0.43 6. 0.34 16. 0.45 26. 0.53 36. 0.64 46. 0.47 7. 0.69 17. 0.89 27. 0.36 37. 0.83 47. 0.42 8. 0.82 18. 0.48 28. 0.41 38. 0.63 48. 0.74 9. 0.68 19. 0.28 29. 0.70 39. 0.62 49. 0.27 10. 0.34 20. 0.16 30. 0.28 40. 0.38 50. 0.38 Table 5

39 Item difficulty indices of the items of the test Sr. No Items Difficulty Frequency Items Remarks 1. Above 0.90 2 2,12 Rejected 2. Between 0.20 and 0.90 47 1,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,21,22,23,24, 25, 26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43 ,44, 45,46,47,48,49,50 Accepted 3. Below 0.20 1 20 Rejected Data about item difficulty can be found in Table 5. There are 47 exam items, ranging in difficulty from 0.20 to 0.90. These things were kept in the test by the researcher. One item was rejected because the difficulty index was less than 0.20, and two items were rejected because the difficulty index was greater than 0.90. Discrimination Power Table 6 Includes item discrimination indices of each test item Item Item Item Item Item Item Item Item

40 No Discrimination No Discrimination No Discrimination No Discrimination 1. 0.27 14. 0.48 27. 0.32 40. 0.47 2. -0.02 15. 0.27 28. 0.35 41. 0.40 3. 0.25 16. 0.40 29. 0.40 42. -0.12 4. 0.20 17. 0.22 30. 0.30 43. 0.42 5. 0.10 18. -0.03 31. 0.57 44. 0.17 6. 0.35 19. 0.15 32. 0.23 45. 0.28 7. 0.35 20. 0.08 33. 0.23 46. 0.03 8. 0.23 21. 0.48 34. -0.05 47. 0.17 9. 0.25 22. 0.10 35. 0.13 48. 0.32 10. 0.28 23. 0.15 36. 0.32 49. 0.20 11. 0.37 24. 0.23 37. 0.28 50 0.32 12. 0.07 25. 0.17 38. 0.32 13. 0.13 26. 0.67 39. 0.43 Table 7 Item discrimination indices of the items of the test Sr No Item Discrimination Frequency Items Remarks 1. Between 0.40 10 14,16,21,26,29,31,39,40,41,43 Very good

41 and 0.90 2. Between 0.30 and 0.39 10 6,7,11,27,28,30,36,38,48,50 Reasonably good 3. Between 0.20 and 0.29 14 1,3,4,8,9,10,15,17,24,32,33,37,45,49 Marginal 4. 0.19 and below 16 2,5,12,13,18,19,20,22,23,25,34,35,42, 44,46,47 Rejected The statistics for the discrimination index are shown in Table 7. There are ten entries on the list with a discrimination index of 0.40 to 0.90. These test items were not revised by the researcher and were kept in the test. The ten test items with discrimination of 0.30 to 0.39 were fairly good and required just a little revision. The 14 test items with a discrimination index of 0.20 to 0.29 were somewhat good in terms of readability and language clarity and should be revised. The remaining 16 items were excluded because their discrimination was less than 0.19. Distractor Analysis Table 8 Includes the responses of students on each test item Item No Correct Responses A Upper Lower B Upper Lower C Upper Lower D Upper Lower 1. C 2 12 2 8 54 38 2 2

42 2. B 3 0 56 57 0 3 1 0 3. A 35 20 7 8 16 27 2 5 4. D 0 4 27 31 5 9 28 16 5. C 4 7 1 3 53 47 2 3 6. C 7 5 12 30 31 10 10 15 7. B 2 5 52 31 2 17 4 7 8. C 0 6 1 9 56 42 3 3 9. C 3 9 6 18 48 33 3 0 10. D 16 14 10 14 5 16 29 12 11. A 49 27 4 9 7 21 0 3 12. C 2 3 0 3 58 54 0 0 13. A 30 22 7 26 20 12 3 9 14. A 53 24 4 11 0 18 3 7 15. B 11 13 40 24 9 15 0 8 16. C 14 27 2 4 39 15 5 4 17. C 0 3 0 3 60 47 0 7 18. B 2 9 28 30 30 20 0 1 19. C 0 5 39 41 21 12 0 2 20. D 6 19 8 14 34 20 12 7 21. C 1 3 4 19 51 22 4 16 22. A 35 29 4 17 19 12 2 2 23. A 32 23 8 11 3 14 17 12

43 24. B 3 5 51 37 0 16 6 2 25. B 6 7 24 14 25 30 5 9 26. B 7 28 52 12 0 19 1 1 27. B 4 16 31 12 18 27 7 5 28. D 3 12 20 18 2 16 35 14 29. D 1 9 2 9 3 12 54 30 30. D 26 31 1 6 7 15 26 8 31. A 44 10 11 32 2 12 3 6 32. C 4 5 5 11 48 34 3 10 33. A 42 28 10 20 4 6 4 6 34. C 2 2 11 8 47 50 0 0 35. A 54 1 2 46 1 6 3 7 36. C 0 6 6 13 48 29 16 12 37. B 0 3 58 41 2 8 0 8 38. C 1 7 6 12 47 28 6 13 39. B 3 9 50 24 6 17 1 10 40. A 37 9 17 28 0 8 6 15 41. B 10 16 29 5 2 16 19 23 42. C 8 5 7 17 21 28 4 10 43. B 6 21 50 25 4 13 0 1 44. B 10 11 21 11 29 34 0 4

44 45. A 34 17 22 12 2 16 2 15 46. B 1 4 29 27 10 9 20 20 47. B 4 9 30 20 2 15 24 16 48. B 2 12 54 35 4 10 0 3 49. C 9 9 11 22 22 10 18 19 50. D 4 12 16 21 8 14 32 13 Table 8 lists 200 possible responses, 20 of which are plausible and 180 of which are implausible. Distractor analysis' primary goal is to distinguish between plausible and implausible response possibilities. It demonstrates negative discrimination because the individuals in the bottom group choose the majority of the distractors. On the basis of distractor analysis of each item, the items with ranks 2, 6, 9, 10, 13, 16, 18, 20, 22, 23, 24, 27, 28, 34, 36, 42, 45, 46, 47 were excluded. Reliability The Kuder Richardson formula was used by the researcher to determine the test’s reliability. The reliability coefficient was 0.7 which was a satisfactory result. Discussion In the present study, the researcher used item analysis procedure i.e., item difficulty, discrimination power, and distractor analysis. Item difficulty described how the particular test item is too difficult, moderate, or too easy. Test items with a difficulty index above 0.75 indicate that items are too easy. Similarly, test items having a difficulty index below 0.20 means these are too difficult. In the present study, items with ranks 2, 12, and 20 are rejected as being too easy and too difficult. Test items with ranks 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23,

45 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, and 50 showing difficulty index range from 0.20 to 0.75 were retained. Test items with ranks 6, 7, 11, 12, 16, 21, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 36, 38, 39, 40, 41, 43, 48, and 50 having discrimination indices range from 0.40 to 0.90 were very good. Test items with ranks 1, 3, 4, 8, 9, 10, 15, 17, 24, 32, 33, 37, 45, and 49 having discrimination indices between 0.20 to 0.39 were marginal and need revision. But test items with discrimination indices below 0.20 i.e., 2, 5, 12, 13, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23, 25, 34, 35, 42, 44, 46, and 47 were rejected. There were 50 test items for the item analysis procedure. It shows that there are 200 response options and out of which 180 were implausible which indicates the quality of detractors. Test items ranks 2, 6, 9, 10, 13, 16, 18, 20, 22, 23, 24, 27, 28, 34, 36, 42, 45, 46, 47 were excluded being plausible response options. The reliability of the instrument was determined by using the Kuder Richardson K20 formula which is suggested for test items having a varying level of difficulty. The reliability coefficient was 0.7 which was found satisfactory. Conclusions The rigorous process of items analysis showed that the overall difficulty of the test was within the range of 0.20 to 0.75. Only 10 test items were good being in the acceptable range of discrimination power, i.e., 0.20 to 0.90. Test items in the range of discrimination power from 0.20 to 0.39 were marginally good and need revision. The remaining 16 test items were rejected having a discrimination index of 0.19 and below. This highlights the poor discrimination power of the test items selected from the past 5 years' papers conducted by FBISE. Because most items have weak discrimination power and are not useful for separating strong and weak examines. Keeping in mind, during distracter analysis, 20 test items were rejected having response options plausible. The

46 reliability coefficient was 0.7, indicating that the reliability of the past 5-years mathematics paper is satisfactory. The findings of the present study conclude that there is a need to prepare test items for standardized achievement tests on mathematics based on item analysis (Item difficulty, Discrimination Index, and Distracter analysis). Because, standardized achievement tests are known for a larger population comprised of students with varying learning abilities, belonging to different localities, following different levels of classroom instructions, etc. Recommendations Following were the recommendations of the present study: 1. The present study was solely for students of grade 9th opting for mathematics as an elective subject. There is a need to further conducted research studies on other subjects like physics, chemistry, biology, etc. for students of different grades. 2. Only four institutions in Islamabad were included in the analysis. As a result, it is suggested that more institutions be visited to obtain a more realistic picture of student responses. References AGWAGAH, U. N., & Usman, K. O. (2003). Training of undergraduate teachers in Nigerian universities: focus on problems of effective integration and attitude of students to computers in mathematics instruction. Science Education Department-University of Nigeria, NSUKKA. Akinsola, M. K., & Tella, A. (2003). Effectiveness of individualistic and cooperative teaching strategies in learning geometry and problem-solving in Mathematics among junior secondary schools in Nigeria. Personality Study and Group Behavior, 23, 95-105. Amedahe, F. K., & Asamoah-Gyimah, E. (2016). Introduction to measurement and evaluation.

47 Bailey, K. M. (1998). Learning about Language Assessment: Dilemmas. Decisions and Directions. Bland, J. M., & Altman, D. (1986). Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. The Lancet, 327(8476), 307-310. Blank, R. K., De Las Alas, N., & Smith, C. (2007). Analysis of the quality of professional development programs for mathematics and science teachers: Findings from a cross-state study. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers, 25, 2017. Borghouts, L. B., Slingerland, M., & Haerens, L. (2017). Assessment quality and practices in secondary PE in the Netherlands. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 22(5), 473-489. Chakrabartty, S. N. (2013). Best split-half and maximum reliability. IOSR Journal of Research & Method in Education, 3(1), 1-8. Crocker, L., & Algina, J. (1986). Introduction to classical and modern test theory. Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 6277 Sea Harbor Drive, Orlando, FL 32887. DeVellis, R. F. (2006). Classical test theory. Medical care, S50-S59. Downing, S. M. (2004). Reliability: on the reproducibility of assessment data. Medical education, 38(9), 1006-1012. Ebel, R. L. (1972). Essentials of educational measurement (1st ed.). New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (1993). How to design and evaluate research in education (Vol. 7). New York: McGraw-Hill. Gronlund, N. E. (1998). Assessment of student achievement. Allyn & Bacon Publishing, Longwood Division, 160 Gould Street, Needham Heights, MA 02194-2310; tele.

48 Hanif, M., Khan, T. A., Masroor, U., & Amjad, A. (2017). Development of online RAW achievement battery test for primary level. Cogent Education, 4(1), 129-332. Kimberlin, C. L., & Winterstein, A. G. (2008). Validity and reliability of measurement instruments used in research. American journal of health-system pharmacy, 65(23), 2276-2284. Khoshaim, H. B., & Rashid, S. (2016). Assessment of the Assessment Tool: Analysis of Items in a Non-MCQ Mathematics Exam. International Journal of Instruction, 9(1), 119-132. Lange, A., Lehmann, I. J., & Mehrens, W. A. (1967). Using item analysis to improve tests. Journal of Educational Measurement, 4(2), 65-68. Ovwigho, B. O. (2014). Empirical demonstration of techniques for computing the discrimination power of a dichotomous item response test. Journal of Educational and Social Research, 4(1), 189. Pandra, V., Sugiman, & Mardapi, D. (2017). Development of mathematics achievement test for third-grade students at elementary school in Indonesia. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 12(3), 769-776. Retrieved from www.iejme.com Quaigrain, K., & Arhin, A. K. (2017). Using reliability and item analysis to evaluate a teacherdeveloped test in educational measurement and evaluation. Cogent Education, 4(1). Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M., & Zvacek, S. (2000). Assessment for distance education (ch 11). Teaching and learning at a Distance: Foundations of Distance Education.

49 Sural, S. (2016). The Development Study of Thoughts Scale Towards Measurement and Assessment Course on High Education. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, 4(1), 79-95. Yarnold, P. R. (2014). How to Assess the Inter-Method (Parallel-Forms) Reliability of Ratings Made on Ordinal Scales: Emergency Severity Index (Version 3) and Canadian Triage Acuity Scale. Optimal Data Analysis, 3(4), 50-54.

50 PER 04-01-22 Social-Emotional Teaching Competence of School Teachers: A Comparison of Self-Assessment and Observational Score Dr. Muhammad Afzal Abstract The current study is a multi-method research project aiming to find differences in self-assessment and observational data on the social-emotional teaching competence of secondary school teachers in Islamabad. First, a five-point Likert scale was developed for measuring the social-emotional teaching competence of school teachers. The same scale was modified for the collection of observations. The scale was based on four sub-constructs: providing a better learning environment, effective communication, teaching life skills, and creating collaboration for learning. The reliability of the 50 self-reported items was.92. The observational scale's inter-rater validity was also.92. The two data sets were fed into SPSS to find any statistical significance. It was found that except for creating collaboration for learning, there was no significant difference the two data sets. Key Words; Social-Emotional Teaching and Learning, Self-Assessment, Observation Research in education and educational psychology has traditionally relied heavily on self-report surveys and questionnaires. Because of their relative ease of administration, capacity to generate sizable samples, and prospects for statistical analysis, qualitative approaches can be highly alluring to researchers who may be dubious of their scientific validity. However, neither the self-reporting nor the observation processes are the best means of gathering information. It's critical to know when to select one over the other while designing a study. Knowing how the data is acquired in each of these methods and the drawbacks of each might help one determine when to choose one technique over the other. Furthermore, even while utilizing only one strategy is sometimes viable, using both is preferred and should be done whenever possible. It should be noted that there are many difficulties and biases that need to be considered when utilizing these methods, and there are many ways to do so (Abernethy, 2015). In psychology, the self-report method is the one that is most frequently utilised. This method, which is still used in studies today, was founded on the idea that "no one knows you like you know yourself" (Paulhus & Vazire, 2007). It has been demonstrated to be useful in accessing information that is only available to an individual, such as intentions, motivations, and past experiences (Mount, Barrick, Strauss, 1994). Nevertheless, due to a number of problems with this approach, including the social desirability response bias and the respondents' capacity to recall prior information at the time of the survey, some have questioned its effectiveness when researching topics that ask respondents for personal information. Examples include evaluating personality problems and work performance. Objectives of the Study The research was carried out with the objective to find is there any significant difference between self-reported and observational score in the teaching social-emotional teaching competence of school teachers in Islamabad.