Teacher beliefs have been shown to play a major role in shaping educational practice, especially in the area of grammar teaching―an area of language education that teachers have particularly strong views on. Traditional grammar education is regularly criticized for its focus on rules-of-thumb rather than on insights from modern linguistics, and for its focus on lower order thinking. A growing body of literature on grammar teaching promotes the opposite, arguing for more linguistic conceptual knowledge and reflective or higher order thinking in grammar pedagogy. In the Netherlands, this discussion plays an important role in the national development of a new curriculum. This study explores current Dutch teachers’ beliefs on the use of modern linguistic concepts and reflective judgment in grammar teaching. To this end, we conducted a questionnaire among 110 Dutch language teachers from secondary education and analyzed contemporary school textbooks likely to reflect existing teachers’ beliefs. Results indicate that teachers generally appear to favor stimulating reflective judgement in grammar teaching, although implementing activities aimed at fostering reflective thinking seems to be difficult for two reasons: (1) existing textbooks fail to implement sufficient concepts from modern linguistics, nor do they stimulate reflective thinking; (2) teachers lack sufficient conceptual knowledge from linguistics necessary to adequately address reflective thinking.
The Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) is an instrument to screen, assess and monitor malnutrition and risk factors, and to triage for interventions. After having translated and culturally adapted the original PG-SGA for the Italian setting, according to International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) Principles, we tested linguistic validity, i.e., perceived comprehensibility and difficulty, and content validity (relevance) of the Italian version of the PG-SGA in patients with cancer and a multidisciplinary sample of healthcare professionals (HCPs). Methods: After the translation and cultural adaptation of the original PG-SGA for the Italian setting, the patient component (i.e., PG-SGA Short Form (SF) was tested for linguistic validity (i.e., comprehensibility ad difficulty) in 120 Italian patients with cancer and 81 Italian HCPs. The full PG-SGA, i.e., patient and professional component of the PG-SGA, was tested for content validity, i.e., relevance, in 81 Italian HCPs. The data were collected by a questionnaire and evaluations were operationalized by a 4-point scale. Through item and scale indices we evaluated the comprehensibility (I–CI, S–CI), difficulty (I-DI, S-DI) and content validity (I-CVI, S-CVI). Scale indices 0.80–0.89 were considered acceptable, and scale indices ≥0.90 were considered excellent. Results: Patients perceived comprehensibility and difficulty of the PG-SGA SF (Boxes) as excellent (S–CI = 0.98, S-DI = 0.96). Professionals perceived comprehensibility of the professional component (Worksheets) as excellent (S–CI = 0.92), difficulty as acceptable (S-DI = 0.85), and content validity of the full PG-SGA as excellent (S-CVI = 0.92). Dietitians gave higher scores (indicating better scores) on comprehensibility, difficulty, and content validity of Worksheet 4 (physical exam) than the other professions. In Worksheet 4, four items were considered most difficult to complete and were considered below acceptable range. Relevance was perceived as excellent by professionals for both the patient component (S-CVI = 0.93) and the professional component (S-CVI = 0.90), resulting in S-CVI = 0.92 for the full PG-SGA. Slight textual modifications were implemented resulting in the final version of the Italian PG-SGA. Conclusions: Translation and cultural adaptation of the original PG-SGA resulted in the Italian version of the PG-SGA that maintained its original purpose and meaning and can be completed adequately and easily by patients and professionals. The Italian PG-SGA is considered relevant for screening, assessing and monitoring malnutrition and risk factors, as well as triaging for interventions by Italian HCPs.
Background & aimsThe Scored Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA©) is a validated nutritional screening, assessment, monitoring, and triage tool. When translated to other languages, the questions and answering items need to be conceptually, semantically, and operationally equivalent to the original tool. In this study, we aimed to assess linguistic and content validity of the PG-SGA translated and culturally adapted for the Norwegian setting, as perceived by Norwegian cancer patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs).MethodsWe have translated and culturally adapted the original PG-SGA for the Norwegian setting, in concordance with the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR). Cancer patients and HCPs, including nurses, dietitians and physicians, were invited to participate. Comprehensibility and difficulty were assessed by patients for the patient component (PG-SGA Short Form), and by HCPs for the professional component. Content validity was assessed for the full PG-SGA by HCPs only. The data were collected by a questionnaire and evaluations were operationalized by a 4-point scale. Item and scale indices were calculated for comprehensibility (Item CI, Scale CI), difficulty (Item DI, Scale DI) and content validity (Item CVI, Scale CVI).ResultsFifty-one cancer patients and 92 HCPs participated in the study. The patients perceived comprehensibility and difficulty of the Norwegian PG-SGA Short Form as excellent (Scale CI = 0.99 and DI = 0.97). However, HCPs perceived comprehensibility and difficulty of the professional component as below acceptable (Scale CI = 0.78 and DI = 0.66), and the physical exam was being rated as the most difficult part (Item DI 0.26 to 0.65). Content validity for the full Norwegian PG-SGA was considered excellent (Scale CVI = 0.99) by the HCPs.ConclusionThe patient component of PG-SGA was considered clear and easy to complete, and the full Norwegian PG-SGA was considered as relevant by HCPs. In the final Norwegian PG-SGA, changes have been made to improve comprehensibility of the professional component. To improve perceived difficulty of completing the professional component, training of professionals is indicated.
