Scribd
Upload
30 views2 pages

Module Validation Instruments

The document outlines various instruments for validating course modules, including an Expert Validation Checklist, Acceptability and Usability Questionnaire, Perceived Usefulness and Effectiveness Survey, Focus Group Discussion Guide, and a Module Evaluation Form. Each instrument includes specific criteria, rating scales, and sample questions to assess the quality, usability, and effectiveness of the course modules. These tools aim to ensure that the modules align with educational standards and meet the needs of learners and educators.

Uploaded by

Carima Mamintal
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
30 views2 pages

Module Validation Instruments

The document outlines various instruments for validating course modules, including an Expert Validation Checklist, Acceptability and Usability Questionnaire, Perceived Usefulness and Effectiveness Survey, Focus Group Discussion Guide, and a Module Evaluation Form. Each instrument includes specific criteria, rating scales, and sample questions to assess the quality, usability, and effectiveness of the course modules. These tools aim to ensure that the modules align with educational standards and meet the needs of learners and educators.

Uploaded by

Carima Mamintal
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Instruments for Validating Course Modules

1. Expert Validation Checklist or Rubric


This checklist is used by experts to evaluate the quality and relevance of a course module.

Sample Domains and Criteria:


- Objectives alignment with content
- Clarity and coherence of topics
- Appropriateness of instructional strategies
- Accuracy of information
- Organization and sequence
- Cultural and contextual relevance

Rating Scale:
4 – Strongly Agree
3 – Agree
2 – Disagree
1 – Strongly Disagree

Comments Section: (for qualitative feedback)

2. Acceptability and Usability Questionnaire


Used to assess the usability of the module by teachers or students.

Key Indicators:
- Language clarity
- Engagement level
- Practicality of activities
- Relevance to curriculum
- Ease of use

Rating Scale:
5 – Very Acceptable
4 – Acceptable
3 – Neutral
2 – Unacceptable
1 – Very Unacceptable

3. Perceived Usefulness and Effectiveness Survey


Used to assess how beneficial the module is for learners.

Sample Statements:
- The module helped improve my understanding of the topic.
- Activities in the module encouraged critical thinking.

Rating Scale:
5 – Strongly Agree
4 – Agree
3 – Neutral
2 – Disagree
1 – Strongly Disagree

4. Focus Group Discussion (FGD) Guide


Used for qualitative validation through discussions with users.

Sample Questions:
- What aspects of the module did you find most useful?
- Were there any parts you found confusing or irrelevant?
- How can this module be improved?

5. Module Evaluation Form (DepEd/CHED-Aligned)


Based on national standards to ensure module quality.

Sample Areas of Evaluation:


- Alignment with curriculum standards
- Pedagogical soundness
- Assessment strategies
- Inclusivity and accessibility
- Technical and visual presentation

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy