A discrepancy in discrepancy scores? Comparing the Borich and Ranked Discrepancy Models for determining professional development needs

Abstract

The Borich (1980) model has been widely used to determine professional development (PD) needs of school-based agricultural education (SBAE) teachers over the past 40-plus years. However, recent criticism, primarily focused on a purported statistical issue, has led to development of the Ranked Discrepancy Model [RDM (Narine & Harder, 2021)] as a potential alternative. This article provides perspective on the statistical issue in question and compares the results of using the Borich model and the RDM to assess precision agriculture (PA) PD needs of Arkansas SBAE teachers (N = 44). Our quantitative results indicated the two models produced different PD priorities, especially among the highest rated priorities. The mean weighted discrepancy scores [MWDSs (Borich model)] and the ranked discrepancy scores [RDSs (RDM)] had a shared variance of 54.8%; the PD priority rankings established by the two methods had a shared variance of 47.6%. Additionally, the number of tied priorities with the RDM complicated identifying priority PD workshop topics. We recommend further research and dialogue before wholesale abandonment of the Borich model for the RDM as a method of determining PD needs.

Keywords

• measurement theory
• statistical theory
• research methods
• SDG 4: Quality Education