See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273817898

Development and Validation of Observation

Protocol for Gender Equity in Classroom:
Towards Achieving Gender...

Article March 2015

CITATIONS READS

2 104

2 authors, including:

Allen A. Espinosa
Philippine Normal University
12 PUBLICATIONS 6 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Confronting misconceptions in large Biochemistry and Molecular Biology classes through active learning
strategies View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Allen A. Espinosa on 02 December 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. All in-text references underlined in blue are added to the original document
and are linked to publications on ResearchGate, letting you access and read them immediately.
 Copyright 2014, American-Eurasian Network for Scientific Information publisher

Research Journal of Social Sciences

JOURNAL home page: http://www.aensiweb.com/RJSS 2015 March; 8(2): pages 1-12.

Published Online 24 November 2014. Research Article

Development and Validation of Observation Protocol for Gender Equity in

Classroom: Towards Achieving Gender Equality in Education
1Marie Paz E. Morales and 2Allen A. Espinosa
1
Educational Policy Research and Development Center, Philippine Normal University, 1000 Manila, Philippines.
2
Faculty of Science, Technology and Mathematics, Philippine Normal University, 1000 Manila, Philippines.

Received: 25 September 2014; Revised: 20 October 2014; Accepted: 1 November 2014; Available online: 24 November 2014

2014 AENSI PUBLISHER All rights reserved

ABSTRACT

The present study develops an observation protocol intended to evaluate gender equity inside the classroom. Literature about gender
and education and research instrument development were reviewed prior to the development of the observation protocol. The developed
instrument was then content and face validated by panel of experts and was pilot tested to in-service teachers. Kappa statistics and intra-
class coefficient was used to determine agreement among and within raters which yielded a value of 0.83 for Kappa coefficient and 0.70
and 0.93 for single and average intra-class coefficient respectively. Reliability coefficient Cronbachs alpha was computed from the
instrument which yielded a value of 0.935. Finally, factor analysis was also utilized to determine the statistical constructs of the instrument.
Revision was done based from the result of the validation process. The final instrument yielded eight constructs anchored on the 21st
Century Learning Framework: (1) Instruction and assessment (learning actuators, expanding literacies, climate of assessment and
transparency); (2) Classroom management and environment (changing habits and roles); (3) Teacher and student interaction (mentoring and
community); (4) Medium of instruction (mentoring community); (5) Teaching strategy (self-initiated transfer and thought and abstraction);
(6) Loco parentis (changing habits and roles); (7) Instructional material (climate and assessment; and (8) Verbal teacher response (changing
habits and roles). Further validation is hereby recommended to standardize the developed observation protocol.

Key words: gender equity, gender equality, classroom observation protocol, research instrument development

INTRODUCTION With the aim to achieve an educated community,

Education for All(EFA) was conceived and launched at
Education has always been valued and recognized the World Conference on Education for All in 1990 by
as a crucial instrument in improving the welfare of the UNESCO, UNDP, UNFPA, UNICEF and the World
country and in alleviating poverty. Meinardus [10] Bank. The EFA movement is a global commitment of
claimed that the human capital theory highlights the providing quality basic education for all children,
significant function of the quality of the countrys youth and adults. Mesa [11] confirmed that equal
education to its economic development. Accordingly, if access to education makes it possible for social and
the citizens are better educated, the greater are the economic mobility of the less fortunate.
chances of economic development. It has been singled One of the six Education for All goals is to
out that the modern world is casually termed as eliminate gender disparities in the primary and in the
knowledge society because education and secondary levels by 2005, and to achieve gender
information production have become the factors equality in education by 2015. EFA focuses on
influential to international competitiveness. ensuring girls full and equal access to and

Corresponding Author: Marie Paz E. Morales, Educational Policy Research and Development Center, Philippine Normal
University, 1000 Manila, Philippines.
E-mail: morales.mpe@pnu.edu.ph
2 Marie Paz E. Morales and Allen A. Espinosa, 2015 / Research Journal of Social Sciences 8(2), March, Pages: 1-12
achievement in quality basic education. This has been
pursued as the Millennium Development Goal of East
Asia and Pacific Regional UN Girls Education
Initiative [20]. The major goal is to ensure the
availability of quality education for all girls and boys
across East Asia and the Pacific region. The first
attempt to achieve this goal is to reach gender parity or
equal proportions of girls and boys, in both the primary
and the secondary levels. The Philippines was
identified as one of those countries that indicated near
parity in 2005. In fact, in 2008, Manahan [9] quoted
Pres. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo of saying We are
proud of the gains in gender equality in the Philippines.
We are number one in the world in terms of gender
parity in literacy and in health.In addition, the
Philippines has been identified to score relatively high
on global gender equality indices indicating an overall
improvement in recent decades in the situation of
women. Several researches [3-5,9] found the same
theme on gender parity in the Philippines.However, as
pointed out by Mesa [11], most studies on gender
disparities were focused on Philippines as a country
compared to other countries. The need to assess gender
disparity within the country is hereby deemed
necessary.
Even with a good stance in gender parity and
gender equality which is indicated by an overall
improvement, thePhilippines is still far from achieving
gender equality in education, a goal that goes beyond
gender parity and access to education (gender equality
toeducation)[20]. This also includes equality in the
quality of education received and in the teaching and
learning processes (gender equality in education) as
well as in the opportunities available through education
(gender equality through education). Apparently, in
classrooms, gender biases can be observed in textbooks
and learning materials, with women and men often
portrayed in stereotypical roles (e.g., girls looking after
younger siblings, women doing errands, boys playing
football, men as policemen, doctors or leaders, etc.). It
is also observed in the practices of teachers and how
they interact with students - girls/women and boys/men
still often given tasks which are considered typically
feminine or masculine academic and training fields
[20].
As recommended by UNESCO [20], while gender
parity indices are calculated and used to monitor
progress, the more qualitative aspects of achieving
gender equality should also be looked into. Indicators,
data and information are needed to assess the extent to
which gender equality is being achieved in terms of
processes and outcomes in education. This will then
lead to understanding of gender gaps that will lead to
actions addressingsuch gaps. Thus, the objective of the
present study is to developand validate agender equity
in classroom observation protocol. This instrument is
intended to assess the gender equality in education
quality specifically in the aspects of instructional
language, classroom materials and teaching aids,
textbooks, curriculum, activities and interactions, and
classroom management. Specifically, the study aims to:
identify pre-deterministic constructs, criteria and
indicators of gender equity in classroom observation
protocol based from literature reviews, and
experts/teachers views;
develop and validate gender equity in classroom
observation protocol based on the pre-deterministic
construct, criteria and indicators of gender sensitive
education; and
test the inter-rater and intra-rater reliability of the
gender equity in classroom observation protocol.
Literature and Background:
Terminologies on Gender Studies:
In gender studies, gender equality refers to the
principle of assessing quality of men and women and
their right to enjoy equal conditions realizing their full
human potentials to contribute to and benefit from the
results of development, and with the state recognizing
that all human beings are free and equal in dignity and
rights Gender equity is the fairness and justice in the
distribution of benefits and responsibilities between
men and women. It recognizes that men and women
have different needs and power that these should be
identified and addressed in a manner that rectifies the
imbalance between them. Gender sensitivity connotes
the ability to understand and consider the socio-cultural
factors underlying gender-based discrimination,
socialization of men and women into certain behaviors
or opportunities, power relations between men and
women, as well as the different needs, problems and
levels of access to resources that they have. Finally,
gender discrimination refers to any distribution,
exclusion or restrictions made on the basis of socially
constructed gender roles and norms that prevent a
person, female or male, from enjoying full human
rights.
Gender and Education:
UNESCOs [20] education goals include among
others ensuring that by 2015 all children, particularly
girls, children in difficult circumstances and those
belonging to ethnic minorities, have access to, and
complete, free and compulsory primary education of
good quality and eliminating gender disparities in
primary and secondary education by 2005, especially
achieving gender equality in education by 2015, with a
focus on ensuring girls full and equal access to and
achievement in basic education of good quality.
One of the Millennium Development Goal (MDG)
to promote gender equality and empower women was
launched in May 2002 by UNGEI aimed to eliminate
3 Marie Paz E. Morales and Allen A. Espinosa, 2015 / Research Journal of Social Sciences 8(2), March, Pages: 1-12
gender disparity in primary and secondary education
preferably by 2005 and at all levels by 2015 [20]. This
MDG program sought to establish networks and
partnerships among experts and organization
promoting equality in education. East Asia and Pacific
Regional UNGEIs major goal was to ensure
availability of quality education for all girls and boys
across region. As a monitoring scheme, UNESCO [20]
used Gender Parity indices to indicate equal or near-
equal proportions for girls and boys in the different
levels of education. Accordingly, of the 19 countries
with available data for 2005, only 16 had reached the
target of gender parity in primary education while at
the secondary level, only 9 countries achieved parity by
2005. Philippines was included in the list of 16
countries that reached gender parity in primary
education but not in secondary and tertiary levels.
EFAs Global Monitoring Report showed that
based on the past trends, 1991-2005, Philippines
included among the list of countries which are at risk
of not being able to achieve gender parity in all levels
by 2015 or 2025. This was supported by Social Watch
that although the Philippines remains among the
countries with a relatively high gender equity index,
scoring alongside Australia and Latvia, its pace of
development in gender equity over the past years is
dismal prodding Social Watch International monitors
to rate Philippines GEI progress as stagnant.
Accordingly, its pace of development is almost at the
same rate as countries with the lowest scores in the
GEI of 2007
Dator-Bercilla [6] claimed that the Philippines
may be relentlessly attempting to maintain gender
equality and equity, yet efforts may not be enough to
facilitate transformative process that will produce
equality and equity between women and men in the
Philippines. In support, magna carta of Women (RA
9710) institutes that all government agencies shall
develop and make available information, education and
communication materials on their specific programs,
services and funding outlays on women empowerment
and gender equality. To this effect, education sectors
specifically the Department of Education (DepEd),
Commission on Higher Education (CHED), and
Technical Education and Skills Development (TESDA)
shall among others develop and promote gender-
sensitive curriculum and develop gender-fair
instructional materials. In the same line, Gender
Equality Guide provided a checklist for gender equality
in the education system which includes:
review of the formulation of courses for possible
gender-bias;
analysis of gender biases in the theories and
perspectives discussed in the course content;
analysis of gender biases in assessments;
review of activities for possible gender biases; and
review of reading materials, instructional and
curriculum materials and textbooks; and review of
class policies for possible gender biases
Supporting the checklist provided are the ideas of
Herz and Sperking [8] who provided a simple formula
for improving gender equality in education: making
girls education affordable, making education a
practical reality, making schools more girl-friendly and
improving education quality. Further, UNESCO
developed a Gender Equality Framework that describes
four dimensions of gender quality in education
equality of access, equality in the learning process,
equality of educational outcomes and equality of
external results reinforcing the need to bring gender
equality to, within, and through education [7]. UNGEI
presented a three-section program to overcome gender
disparities. Area one is focused on enhancing access
and participation of marginalized groups which
included recommendations such as:
building schools at a safe walking distance;
placing community at the center if action;
expanding outreach through alternate modes of
schooling; and expanding opportunities for secondary
schooling
Area two highlights improving school equality
with a gender perspective. This includes inequitable
practices within schools such as teacher attention,
expectations and valuing, differential treatment within
the classroom; and often unequal access to school
spaces, resource and facilities. This also includes
creating child-friendly/girl friendly school
environments and overcoming systematics biases in the
teaching-learning process. Finally, area three focuses
on improving learning outcomes which highlight
consideration of boys learning needs, confronting
child labor and ensuring the school-to-work transition
work for girls.
Instrument Development:
In reviewing gender situation across the world,
EFAs Global Monitoring Report, concluded that
gender parity goal has been missed and gender
equality remains elusive. Admittedly, there is a
considerable concern that the Gender Parity Index
(GPI) can be misleading for assessing true gender
equality in education. Because of this, several new
measurements have been included such as Gender
Equality Index (GEI) developed by UNESCO [20],
Education Development Index (EDI), Gender
Development Index (GDI) and Gender Empowerment
Measure (GEM). As claimed by UNGEI [20], these
measures specifically GPIs in Asia Pacific do not
adequately reflect local realities and that they easily
mask disparities at subnational levels. Despite debates
and some observable progress in quantitative terms
neither the goal of gender parity nor that of gender
4 Marie Paz E. Morales and Allen A. Espinosa, 2015 / Research Journal of Social Sciences 8(2), March, Pages: 1-12

equality has made sufficient progress. Thus, comes in
the qualitative and other nature of measures to extract
better observations in terms of gender equality specific
to education quality. Tracy and Lane [19] in their study
on gender-equity teaching behaviors, used the Gender
Equity Observation Form(GEO) to assess a 15-minute
segment of a teachers use of his or her gender-
equitable teaching behaviors (GETBs) by recording
tally marks each time when he/she observes the
following techniques: acceptance, praise, use of higher-
level questions, positive and negative criticism, wait
time and proximity. Although, GEO form can describe
gender biases in the classroom and contribute in
achieving gender parity and gender equality in the
aspect of quality education, the instrument is a self-
rating instrument which highlights frequency. Thus,
there is a perceived need for another instrument for
classroom observation to better extract more and
detailed descriptions of gender-equitable teacher
behaviour and gender-biases in the classroom.
Developing a new instrument entails a lot of
quantitative analysis. But qualitative approaches are
also needed to probe further, clarify and establish
verified quantitative results. These processes
(quantitative design and qualitative approach) are
highlighted in developing Views on Nature of Science
and Education (VOSE) and Colorado Learning
Attitude Science Survey (CLASS). Adams et al., [1]
used literature reviews, existing survey instruments and
pilot study which included student interview and face
& content validation by experts focused on qualitative
approaches to extract probable contents and pre-
deterministic constructs of the intended survey
instrument. Comparably, Chen used quantitative design
Table 1: Participants of the Study.
Stages of the Study
Preparation and Pilot Study
Item Design and Construction
Pilot Testing and Data Analysis 145 basic education teachers
with qualitative approaches in the development of
Views on Nature of Science and Education (VOSE).
Chen claimed that the results were dependable because
the items originated from the respondents point of
view instead of from the researchers presumption of
reasonable answers, thus has a high reliability.
Methodology:
Mixed method was utilized in the study.
Quantitative research design combined with qualitative
approaches was used in developing a classroom
observation protocol intended to gender and culture
disparity and equality in education quality. Survey
research was used to determine the feasibility of the
instrument in the area of evaluation gender biases,
disparities and gaps in education quality. The study
consisted of three major stages: Preparation and pilot
study; item design and construction; and validation and
reliability determination.
A. Participants of the Study:
In all the three stages, convenient sampling was
done to identify the appropriate participants for each of
the stages identified. In the preparation and pilot study,
the chosen participants were 45 graduate students of
the Philippine Normal University - College of Graduate
Studies and Teacher Education Research taking Master
of Arts in the different disciplines. These participants
are currently teaching in basic education. Five experts
were identified to validate and re-validate the
developed instruments in the design and construction
stage. About 145 basic education teachers were
identified for the third stage of the study.
Participants/Sample Sampling Process
45 graduate students Convenient sampling
5 Experts Convenient sampling
Convenient sampling

B. Summary:
Table 2: Summary of the Methodology.
Stages of the Study Data Collection Data Analysis
Preparation and Pilot Interviews, literature search and review, administration Transcriptions
Study of open response survey
Item Design and Focus group discussions and interviews Average ratings and Aikens content
Construction Checklist for content validity of the instrument validity coefficient
Inter-rater Kappa coefficient
Intra-class coefficient
Pilot Testing and Data Evaluation checklist and survey Cronbach alpha coefficient
Analysis Factor Analysis

C. Stage 1: Preparation and Pilot Study:
Using literature reviews focused on gender equity
and gender equality in education quality, pre-
deterministic constructs of the intended tool were
identified. The instrument was highly influenced by the
different strategies provided by to the classroom a
more equitable place. Major construct he identified
included: teacher/student interactions, instructional
styles and analysis of instructional materials. The pilot
study open-response survey to selected graduate
5 Marie Paz E. Morales and Allen A. Espinosa, 2015 / Research Journal of Social Sciences 8(2), March, Pages: 1-12
students of the Philippine Normal University. They
were asked several questions on the constructs
presented by Frawley (2205). Transcriptions and
summaries were used data deduced from the pilot study
and the information derived from literature and was
used as bases of the content and format of the
evaluation tool.
D. Stage 2: Item Design and Construction:
Initial design and format of items resulted to
version 1 or the draft version of the evaluation tool.
This instrument was subjected to content and face
validation by five experts. Faculty of the Philippine
Normal University formed the pool of experts. Panel
interview with the experts who validated the instrument
was conducted to clarify the content and design of the
items of draft version. Their suggestions were
incorporated in the revision of the draft version. A
second validation was done by the same experts. Three
of these experts were the same experts who validated
draft version. The validation was conducted to
determine if all the comments and suggestions were
properly implemented.
E. Stage 3: Pilot Testing and Data Analysis:
Analysis of data gathered from the validation
procedure included computation of evaluation averages
of the experts and content validity coefficient.
Agreement among raters and within raters was also
determined using Kappa statistics and intra-class
coefficient. Factor analysis was also used to determine
the statistical constructs. Reliability of the instrument
was based on the empirical process of the survey
design as well as statistical tests of all the items and per
category. This scheme of qualitatively establishing the
reliability was adopted from the study of Chen. It was
part of the procedure of the research that the reliability
was qualitatively established by conducting interviews
with the would-be end-users of the instrument. In this
case, the process ensured that there would be internal
consistencies of the items in the instrument which were
based from the possible arguments of the end users.
The instrument was used by 145 basic education
teachers teaching in government schools in the
National Capital Region to quantitatively measure the
reliability. From this, Cronbachs alpha which
represents the reliability measure of the instrument was
determined.
Results and Discussion
Version 1- Gender Equity Classroom Observation
Protocol:
The draft version (version 1) of the observation
protocol was developed using literature reviews and
empirical data provided by the pilot study. Forty
graduate students surveyed expressed their idea and
concepts of a classroom setting free of gender and
culture gaps and biases. They specifically identified
steps which they would undertake to ensure that there
are no gender stereotyping in their classroom in the
following areas as presented in the summarized
accounts below:
Classroom Environment:
Proper gender roles are explained to students
Teasing about gender issues is not encouraged
I give equal opportunity to them. I created
activities that will help them to communicate to each
other.
Everybody can be a volunteer in any task.
Even during seating arrangement, it should be in
random not in terms of gender.
We try to eliminate gender stereotyping by treating
all individuals as if they belong to one group.
Students are arranged in a Male-Female-Male-
Female manner. Genders are arranged alternately
Everybody is given a chance to be assigned in
work or position. If there are stereotyping , I clarify it
to students.
Make sure to recognize both genders in terms of
achievements etc.
Seating arrangements are done alphabetical,
alternating boys and girls.
Equal treatment to the male and female students in
terms of giving rewards, punishments etc.
I ensure that boys and girls have the same
privileges inside the classroom.
I assure that students are not bullying, maintain
peace and order in classroom.
The seating arrangement is not arranged based on
gender but either alphabetical or based on student
preference.
Choosing the right words
The activities provided for the students is suitable
for girls and boys or female and male students. There
are equal opportunities provided for them.
I make sure that the seating arrangement is mostly
alternate boys and girls.
They are seated randomly making sure that boys
can are evenly distributed since they are lesser
Balance the context by citing other examples other
than those found in the book.
I make sure that the environment has no gender
stereotyping by means of designing the classroom in
such a way that it doesnt look girlish or boyish,
positing some quotations about equality among
genders (and even races and ethnicity).
Student-Teacher Interaction:
6 Marie Paz E. Morales and Allen A. Espinosa, 2015 / Research Journal of Social Sciences 8(2), March, Pages: 1-12
Giving my students an equal attention and respect
their opinions
Discussion using people as examples does not
focus in one gender.
Equal chances to both genders (as to who) during
discussions, or group activity.
All inquiries are entertained by the teacher.
By not being biased with the student of opposite
gender. By trying to get along with them and
understanding their nature.
Explain that it is not the intention. Then cite other
examples that includes/apply to both gender.
Providing activities that are best suited for both
girls and boys.
I try to make sure that they both understand. Just
like the topics on reproductive system, although it
concerns either male or female parts, care and others,
I try to explain that they must know especially care
concerns.
Everyone is given equal treatment.
Being fair to each of the students/gender.
Both gender is given equal opportunity to
participate in the class.
Students are open and they are welcome to ask
and interact with the teacher.
I ensure that boys and girls can express their ideas
and feelings.
No favouritism
Positive reinforcements are given equally for both
genders.
No biases/favouritism
Avoid talking about topics that would induce
stereotyping.
Assessment:
Fair assessment is given to every student
regardless of their gender.
In terms of performance assessment, the task to be
performed is generic in nature.
Uniform assessments are given to all members of
the class.
Editing of test questions especially about
situational analysis.
Assessment strategies are applicable for both
genders.
Same level of questions in the assessment, same
grading system
I give evaluation to both male and female students
with the same evaluative materials.
They are graded fairly and objectively.
Activities and exams are given to both genders.
Equality of the type of tests. Being sensitive with
the questions/items/sentences.
Assessment tools are designed for both male and
female students
Questions are for both genders
Equal chance in oral and written outputs. Well
distributed genders in groupings
By constructing test questions/performance-based
test that suits the nature of male and female.
These graduate students-participants also
unambiguously defined how they would ensure that the
instructional materials that they are using such as
journals, textbooks, multi-media materials are gender
sensitive. Below were their major views and ideas:
By reviewing it and modifying it to become gender
sensitive.
Peer review and books are also
reviewed/evaluated before bring recommended as
textbook.
Most of the science lessons I teach are not gender
sensitive (Physics/Chemistry).
Instructional materials should be inspected first
before using them in the classroom.
Both parties are involved and there are no
stereotyping.
Instructional materials are reviewed first not just
by the faculty but also the management before they are
adopted.
We examine the instructional materials that we use
as to gender sensitivity.
Standard-based books, journals, textbooks and
multimedia.
I study and read first to ensure gender sensitivity
Pre-evaluation of books and pre-reading of
journals.
It is evaluated by AC, SAC and Teachers
We conduct peer evaluation in using the
instructional materials.
I make sure that it does not contain words/sample
situations that prejudice either male or female learner
The language used is evaluated.
I choose carefully all the instructional materials
used in the discussion
I review them ahead of time. In instances there are
gender biases, I opt to look for alternative.
They further mention about the advantages of a
gender sensitive classroom and instruction as: gender
sensitive classroom and instruction will give an equal
opportunity to all students regardless of their gender, it
provides a healthy psychological environment for the
learners, no gender stereotyping, issues and concerns
that will post changes against a particular gender are
eliminated, everyone is treated equally, students wont
be able to feel discriminated, everyone is given
confidence and peaceful, friendly learning
environment, encourages peace/equity, encourages
7 Marie Paz E. Morales and Allen A. Espinosa, 2015 / Research Journal of Social Sciences 8(2), March, Pages: 1-12

student to study and excel (healthy competition), and
students can develop self-confidence and self-respect.
In addition to these, they described that gender
sensitive classroom will lead to students gaining more
confidence in the class, promotes a more peaceful
environment, would address bias in terms of
assessment and evaluation, would create a harmless
relationship, students would have equal opportunities
to show their capabilities and to strengthen their
potentials, in Biology it is better to consider issues like
reproductive concepts for boys and girls, more
encouraging and conducive settings for learners,
students would be free in expressing themselves since
there are no biases in the classroom, and students
realize their potential based in ability not gender.
Furthermore, the survey study provided the
participants insights on how the government should
help in achieving gender sensitivity and gender equity
in the classroom as presented below:
By conducting seminars to schools and other
institutions.
By sharing ads/infomercial about gender
sensitivity.
Review the instructional materials
Educate the science teachers about the issue.
Include the discussion in the curriculum
Parallel textbooks, activities and separate lessons
for relevant topics in Biology.
Make sure that the instructional materials
provided are suitable for all genders.
Equal opportunities should be given to both
gender although of course there are some provisions
limited to specific gender that the government should
address.
Enforce greatly gender sensitivity and gender
equity in the classroom.
Provide activities which are applicable to both
genders.
There should be seminars for the teachers on how
to develop a gender sensitive classroom and on how to
maintain gender equity.
Empower women in the society.
Recognize that women can have decent work too
and can be influential in the community.
More information.
Conduct gender sensitivity seminars to teachers to
be implemented by the participating teachers at this
school.
Include this in the curriculum.
Books and other learning materials must cater
equal interest of male and female. There should be no
books that give examples with male only as character
or female only which give the stigma that a particular
book is or a specific gender only
Educating people about the issue
Give seminars to students and teachers about the
effect of gender sensitivity in every individual.
Strengthening the value of united family.
From the above desrciptions provided by the
study,draft version was designed and developed and
was subjected to descriptive and quantitative content
validation by identified experts. Only descriptive
validation was done for face validation. Descriptive
validation highlighted the use of phrases or words to
describe the assessment of the items. These were
presented as comments, remarks or suggestions of the
experts. Quantitative content validation made use of
the 15-item validation checklist. It is a 5-point Likert
scale checklist consisting of items that characterize a
good survey checklist related to the use of culture in
teaching. A summary of the averages per expert ratings
in validating the version 1 is presented in Table 1.

Table 1: Content and Face Validity of Gender Equity Classroom Observation Protocol.
Experts Average Comments/Suggestions
Expert 1 5.00
Expert 2 4.73
Expert 3 4.00
Expert 4 4.70 Consider revising some items for consistency and coherence.
Change some headings also to make them consistent with the others.
How do we measure this po? Whether the teacher uses more male or female examples?
How will teacher role modelling measure gender equity? Seems to be very general.
What do you mean with gender-role content?
The last statement in section F is a repetition of #2.

Expert 5 3.90 Change boys to males and girls to females

Typo errors and punctuations
Too many subheadings and categories
Change font
Average 4.45

On the average, the evaluators had rated the that the ratersassessed the instrument within the higher
developed instrument 4.45 out of 5.0 (Table) indicative range of the Likert scale. This suggested a fair quality
8 Marie Paz E. Morales and Allen A. Espinosa, 2015 / Research Journal of Social Sciences 8(2), March, Pages: 1-12
tool in construction and valid content wise. The third
column provided the suggestion and comments of the
experts. Experts 3, 4, and 5 provided comments and
suggestions for the improvement of the instrument. To
clarify some of the experts comments, panel interview
with themwas done. The panel interview was part of
the non-conventional process to ensure the empirical
reliability of the ratings and validation processes of the
experts.
Revised version of Gender Equity in Classroom:
Observation Protocol:
Table 2: Content and Face Validity of the Revised Version.
Experts Average
Expert 1 5.0
Expert 2 4.7
Expert 3 5.0
Expert 4 4.9
Expert 5 5.0
Average 4.98
Table 3: Content Validity Coefficient (VIK) the Draft and Revised Versions.
Items AikensVIK (Content Validity Coefficient) of the
Draft Version
Average 0.90
The closer the Aikens validity coefficient to one,
the higher content validity an item had [2]. The experts
who rated the items found them valid in terms of
content as shown in the values of content validity
coefficients (VIK1.0). The items in the evaluation tool
are content valid in terms of in the aspect of gender
equity in education quality. For the second round, the
computed content validity coefficient was much closer
to 1.0 (VIK = 0.98) suggesting a better content validity
than the draft version. Experts high rating on the
content validity of the instrument positively suggests
that they view the revised version of the instrument as
conforming to the concepts and principles of gender
equity in education quality. They believe that the
instrument as a whole will be able to perform its
Table 4: Reliability Measure of Gender Equity Classroom Observation Protocol.
Instrument
Gender Equity Classroom Observation Protocol
After the pilot testing, the scores were then
subjected to a statistical treatment to determine the
reliability coefficient Cronbach Alpha of the
instrument. The reliability coefficient was calculated to
be .935. This reliability coefficient is acceptable
because according to Fraenkel and Wallen and Hinkle,
the acceptable values of alpha ranges from 0.70 to
1.00. Further analysis of the Cronbach alpha was made
Ensuring that proper revisions were done as per
experts comments and suggestions, the revised version
(v.2) was subjected to a second round of content and
face validation. A better rating with an over-all mean
of 4.98 out of 5.00 by the five ratersimprovingthe
initial rating of the instrument from the first validation
cycle. Each of the raters evaluated the instrument as
very close to 5.0 (Table 2).
In addition to mean values of experts ratings,
content validity coefficient was calculated per checklist
item to ensure that the instrument was actually rated as
a content valid instrument. These coefficients were
shown in Table 3.
Comments/Suggestions
All revisions suggested were integrated.
AikensVIK (Content Validity Coefficient) of the
Revised Version
0.98
intended task of determining gender gaps and equity in
all the aspects of teaching and learning processes done
inside the classroom.
Reliability:
An indicator of an instrument consistency is
known as reliability. It can indicate the stability of the
data sets across applications or across time. Different
types of reliability are used in different situations such
as test-retest and split half; however, internal
consistency reliability is most appropriate for a test
administered once. It indicates the extent to which the
examinees observed scores are similar to their true
scores.
No. Of Cases (n) Cronbachs Alpha ()
145 0.935
if the item is deleted to ensure precision and agreement
among items. Table 4 shows that items in the
developed instrument were indeed valid and reliable
even if a certain item is removed.
Inter-rater agreement was established to be able to
make sure that experts evaluation or validation are
consistent. The inter-rater coefficient for the final run
of validation was provided in Table 5.
9 Marie Paz E. Morales and Allen A. Espinosa, 2015 / Research Journal of Social Sciences 8(2), March, Pages: 1-12

Table 5: Inter-Rater Coefficient of the Revised Version.

Inter Rater E1-E2 E1-E3 E1-E4 E1-E5 E2-E3 E2-E4 E2-E5 E3-E4 E3-E5 E4-E5
Coefficient
Kappa 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83

As shown in Table 5, all experts agree that the
instrument they were validating and evaluating was
within the standard excellent category as also presented
in the mean values of their ratings (Tables 1 and 2)
and in the Aikens validity coefficients for the two
versions of the instrument (Table 3). Interpretations of
the Kappa coefficients were based on the standards set
by Landis. Meanwhile, the Intra-class coefficient
which is a descriptive statistics that provides the
composite of intra-observer also referred to as intra-
observer variability which is the deviation of a
particular raters score as presented in Table 6.

Table 6: Intra-Class Coefficient Revised Version.

Kind of Measure Intra-Class Correlation p-value
Single 0.70 0.001*
Average 0.98 0.001*
* significant at 0.05

From Table 6, the index of variability for one
single rating is 0.70 classified as very strong
agreement. While the index for the reliability or
agreement of different raters averaged together is 0.98,
close to +1 (perfect) agreement. In both cases (single
and average), difference of measures of scores is
significant (p < 0.05) which means that there were
variable scores but these scores are still in agreement
with each other both within the same rater or among
raters. It can be deduced that intra-rater agreement is
high that supports the validity and reliability of the
instrument.
Further analysis of the reliability of the instrument
was done using factor analysis. Table 7 indicates eight
identified factors with the factors respective items.
Cumulatively, the 10 factors have already explained
86.325% of the total variance and only about 13.675%
is attributed to other variables. After rotation, the
variance leveled off to the 10 factors, however, only
eight factors were attributed to high variance of the
corresponding items. The highest variance is attributed
to factor 1.

Table 7: Factors with the corresponding Items per Construct.

Factors Items
1 B5, B6, B8, B9, B14, C8, C11, C14, C16, C21, C22, C23, C24, C25, C26, C27, C28, D1, D2, D3, D4
2 B7, B10, B11, B12, C13, C15, C16, C17, C18, C19, C20
3 C2, C3, C4, C5, C6, C7
4 B3, C10
5 B1,
6 B4, B5, B14
7 B13
8 C1

Analysis of the items included in each of the
factors resulted to common theme for the items in each
of the factors. Factor 1 with the highest variance
thematically leads to student belief on the use of the
vernacular and culture in the teaching and learning
process. In Factor 2, the items pertain to student views
and beliefs on the integration of culture and language
in the teaching and learning process. Factor 3
suggested a theme related to learning science and
learning literacy; factor 4 on teachers role; and factor
5 on constructivism. Table 8 provided the summary of
the factors inclusive of the sample items identified in
these factors.

Table 8: Sample items in the constructs of Gender Equity Classroom Observation Protocol.
Factor 1: Instruction and Assessment(Learning Actuators, Expanding Literacies, Climate of Assessment and Transparency)
B5: Expects equal academic achievement between males and females
B6: Invites both male and female visitors with non-traditional occupations into the classroom.
Factor 2: Classroom Management/Environment(Changing Habits and Changing Roles)
C13: Practices gender-neutral reading of, and writing on, students' work
C15: Doesnt ignore sexist remarks made by the students, but challenges them to be gender sensitive instead
Factor 3: Teacher-Student Interaction(Mentoring and Community)
C2: Provides more consideration, acclamation, and constructive feedback to males than with females
C3: Calls male students by name and asks them more often with complex and abstract questions than female students
10 Marie Paz E. Morales and Allen A. Espinosa, 2015 / Research Journal of Social Sciences 8(2), March, Pages: 1-12

Factor 4: Medium of Instruction(Mentoring and Community)

B3:Balances questions between males and females during class discussions and observes wait-time
C10: Stereotypes in the language being used.
Factor 5: Teaching Strategy(Self-Initiated Transfer and Thought & Abstraction)
B1: Encourages cooperative learning in cross-gender groupings by mixing the seating arrangement among males and females and by
avoiding dividing students into a single-gender activity groups.
Factor 6: In Loco Parentis(Changing Habits and Changing Roles)
B4:Gives equal help and in-depth guidance to females as well as with males
B5: Expects equal academic achievement between males and females
Factor 7: Instructional Material(Climate of Assessment)
B13:Ensures that books, computer programs, and other curriculum materials are free from stereotyped gender-role behavior
Factor 8: Verbal Teacher Response(Changing Habits and Changing Roles)
C1: Uses "effort-appreciation" statements more often with male than female students.

The identified factors corresponded to the different
constructs initially identified as elements of teaching in
the survey study prior to the design of the instrument.
Moreover, these factors are found to be counterparts of
the nine major construct of the Inside-Out Leaning
Model designed for the 21st century framework by
TechThought which are learning actuators, changing
habits, transparency, self-initiated transfer, mentoring
& community, changing roles, climate of assessment,
thought and abstraction and expanding literacies. The
items in each of the constructs matched with the
characteristics and descriptions of the nine major
components of Inside-Out Learning Model for the 21st
Century Framework. From Table 8, factor 1 intially
identified as Instructiona and assessment construct
matched with the characteristic features of learning
actuators, expanding literacies, climate of assessment
and transparency; factor 2 intially themed as classroom
management and environment matched with changing
habits and changing roles; factor 3 grouped as teacher-
student interaction and factor 4 themed as medium of
instruction corresponded with Mentoring and
Community; factor 5 termed as teaching strategy
coordinated with the characteristics of Self-initiated
Transfer and Though & Abstraction; factor 6 as In
Loco Parentis and factor 8 as verbal teacher response
matched with Changing Habits and Changing Roles;
and factor 7 as Instructional Material as climate of
Assessment.
With the matched constructs and items under each
construct, use of this material as classroom observation
protocol to detect gender biases and promote gender
parity and equality may have a high chance of success.
The tool may also serve as guide for teachers who
would rather promote gender equality in their classes
for better education quality.

Table 9: Summary of statistical characteristics of the Gender Equity Classroom Observation Protocol.
Version 1 Version 2
*n = 47 *n = 47
Content Validity Content Validity
o Over All Mean = 4.45 out of o Over All Mean = 4.98 out of 5.00
5.00 o Aikens Content Validity Coefficient ( VIk) = 0.98
o Aikens Content Validity Cronbachs alpha () = 0.935
Coefficient ( VIk)= 0.90 Inter-rater reliability: 0.83
Average Intra-Class Correlation: 0.98
8 Factors extracted from factor analysis:
o Factor 1: Instruction and Assessment (Learning Actuators, Expanding Literacies, Climate
of Assessment and Transparency)
o Factor 2:Classroom Management/Environment (Changing Habits and Changing Roles)
o Factor 3: Teacher-Student Interaction (Mentoring and Community)
o Factor 4: Medium of Instruction (Mentoring and Community)
o Factor 5: Teaching Strategy (Self-Initiated Transfer and Thought & Abstraction)
o Factor 6: In Loco Parentis (Changing Habits and Changing Roles)
o Factor 7: Instructional Material (Climate of Assessment)
o Factor 8: Verbal Teacher Response (Changing Habits and Changing Roles)

The designed instrument included two versions.
The second version was an improved edition of the first
one with better average ratings of the expert and
Aikens coefficient of validity, acceptable internal
consistency reliability, and extracted factors.Inter-rater
and intra-class correlation are high which notes that
evaluators of the instrument do have common
perception of how the instrument would fair in
determining the gender status in a classroom. It
included features such as Likert-scale format for easier
analysis, items are grouped according to constructs
which were statistically identified, the statistically
identified constructs match the pre-determined
constructs, qualities of a good and acceptable survey
instrument are exemplified by the developed
11 Marie Paz E. Morales and Allen A. Espinosa, 2015 / Research Journal of Social Sciences 8(2), March, Pages: 1-12
instrument as evaluated by experts, and items in the 3.
constructs were empirically determined.
Conclusions and Recommendations:
The study developed an observation protocol for 4.
gender equity in a classroom. The research instrument
was developed based on predeterministic constructs,
criteria and indicators of gender sensitive education.
Content and face validation by panel of experts was 5.
conducted to polish the research instrument.
Afterwards, pilot testingof the instrument to in-service
teachers was done to gather quantitative and qualitative 6.
data. The data collected was then subjected to Kappa
statistics and intra-class coefficient to determine
agreement among and within raters which. This yielded
a value of 0.83 for Kappa and 0.70 and 0.93 for single
and average intra-class coefficient respectively . 7.
Reliability coefficient Cronbachs alpha was also
computed from the instrument. This yielded a value of
0.935. The computed reliability coefficients prove that
the instrument is valid and reliable. Finally, to further 8.
analyze the instrument, factor analysis was also utilized
to determine the statistical constructs of the instrument.
Results of the validation process helps in the
finalization of the research intrument. The final 9.
instrument yielded eight constructs anchored on the
21st Century Learning Framework: (1) Instruction and
assessment (learning actuators, expanding literacies,
climate of assessment and transparency); (2)
Classroom management and environment (changing
habits and roles); (3) Teacher and student interaction
(mentoring and community); (4) Medium of instruction 10.
(mentoring community); (5) Teaching strategy (self-
initiated transfer and thought and abstraction); (6) Loco
parentis (changing habits and roles); (7) Instructional
material (climate and assessment; and (8) Verbal
teacher response (changing habits and roles). 11.
Further validation is hereby recommended to
standardize the developed observation protocol.It is
also suggested that the instrument be localized to and
test the validity of the developed instrument other
nationalities. 12.
References
13.
1. Adams, W.K., 2006. A new instrument for
measuring student beliefs about physics and
learning physics: the Colorado Learning Attitudes
about Science Survey. Retrieved June 6, 2013
fromwww.phet.colorado.edu/.../New%20Instrume 14.
nt%20For%20Measuring%20Student%2Beliefs.pd
f.
2. Aiken, L.R., 1985. Three coefficients for
analyzing the reliability and validity of 15.
ratings.Educational and Psychological, 45: 131-
142.
Balisacan, A. and S. Piza, 2003. 'Nature and
causes of income inequality in the Philippines',
Background Paper for the EADN Income
Distribution Project.
Balisacan, A. and N. Fuwa, 2004. Changes in
spatial income inequality in the Philippines.
Research Paper No. 2004/34.World Institute for
Development Economics Research.
Cruz, L., 2007. Philippine gender gap index status
of Philippine women in Science. Retrieved July 5,
2012 from http://www.asiainnova.es/pdf/cruz.pdf.
Dator-Bercilla, J., 2009. Facing the continuing
challenge of gender inequality and inequity.
Retrieved last July 20, 2013 from
http://www.socialwatch.org/sites/default/files/pdf/
en/09_missingtargets.pdf.
Herz, B., 2006. Educating girls in South Asia:
Promising approaches, UNGEI series UNICEF
ROSA. Retrieved July 15, 2013 from
http://www.unicef.org/rosa/education_2483.htm.
Herz, B. and G. Sperking, 2004. What works in
girls education: Evidence and policies from the
developing world, Council on Foreign Relation.
Retrieved July 15, 2013 from http://www.cfr.org.
Manahan, M., 2010. Focus on women and men in
the Philippines ---Closing the gender gap.
Retrieved July 5, 2014 from
http://www.focusweb.org/philippines/fob-
articles/socio-economic-monitor/391-focus-on-
women-and-men-in-the-Philillines-closing-the-
gender-gap.
Meinardus, R., 2003. The crisis of public
education in the Philippines Retrieved July 17,
2013 from
http://www.fnf.org.ph/liberalopinion/crisis-public-
education-philippines.htm.
Mesa, E., 2007. Measuring education inequality in
the Philippines.Philippine Review of Economics,
44(2): 33-70. Retrieved July 12, 2013 from
http://www.pre.econ.upd.ph/index.php/pre/article/
view/227/0.
_______, 2007. Social Watch Report. Retrieved
July 15, 2013 from
http://www.socialwatch.org/node/9292.
_______, 2007. UNESCO. GENIA ToolKit for
Promoting Gender Equality in Education.
Retrieved July 15, 2013 from
http://www.unescobkk.org/education/gender/resou
rces/genia-toolkit/.
_______, 2010. United Nations Millennium Goal
3: Promote Gender Equity and Empower Women.
Retrieved July 5, 2013 from
http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/gender.shtml.
_______, 2009. East Asia Pacific Regional
UNGEI Retrieved July 12, 2013 from
http://www.ungei.org.
 12 Marie Paz E. Morales and Allen A. Espinosa, 2015 / Research Journal of Social Sciences 8(2), March, Pages: 1-12

16. _______, 2010. East Asia Pacific Regional http://www.teachthought.com/learning/clarifying-

UNGEI Retrieved July 12, 2013 from the-difference-between-students-and-learners/
http://www.ungei.org. 19. Tracy, D.M., M.B. Lane, 1999. Gender-equitable
17. _______, 2013. Gender Equality Guide. Retrieved teaching behaviors: Preservice teachers awareness
July 15, 2013 from and implementation. Equity & Excellence in
http://pcoo.gov.ph/genderfairmedia/buk3_gender_ Education, 32(3): 93-104.
equality_guide.pdf 20. UNESCO, EFA Global Monitoring Report 2008.
18. TeachTought, 2014. The Inside-Out Learning Retrieved July 15, 2013 from
Model: A 21st Century Framework. Retrieved http://www.unesco.org/new/en/education/themes/l
October 1, 2014 from eading-the-international-agenda/efareport/

Appendix A:
Gender Equity Classroom Observation Protocol
Factor 1: Instruction and Assessment (Learning Actuators, Expanding Literacies, Climate of Assessment and Transparency)
Factor 1: Instruction and Assessment
B5: Expects equal academic achievement between males and females
B6: Invites both male and female visitors with non-traditional occupations into the classroom.
Factor 2: Classroom Management/Environment (Changing Habits and Changing Roles)
C13: Practices gender-neutral reading of, and writing on, students' work
C15: Doesnt ignore sexist remarks made by the students, but challenges them to be gender sensitive instead
Factor 3: Teacher-Student Interaction(Mentoring and Community)
C2: Provides more consideration, acclamation, and constructive feedback to males than with females
C3: Calls male students by name and asks them more often with complex and abstract questions than female students
Factor 4: Medium of Instruction (Mentoring and Community)
B3:Balances questions between males and females during class discussions and observes wait-time
C10: Stereotypes in the language being used.
Factor 5: Teaching Strategy (Self-Initiated Transfer and Thought & Abstraction)
B1: Encourages cooperative learning in cross-gender groupings by mixing the seating arrangement among males and females and by
avoiding dividing students into a single-gender activity groups.
Factor 6: In Loco Parentis (Changing Habits and Changing Roles)
B4:Gives equal help and in-depth guidance to females as well as with males
B5: Expects equal academic achievement between males and females
Factor 7: Instructional Material (Climate of Assessment)
B13:Ensures that books, computer programs, and other curriculum materials are free from stereotyped gender-role behavior
Factor 8: Verbal Teacher Response (Changing Habits and Changing Roles)
C1: Uses "effort-appreciation" statements more often with male than female students.

View publication stats