Preliminary scoring

3.1 Preliminary scoring

The following statistical arrangements were performed: (1) Diagnosis of the level and quality of empathetic approach of each of the educational figures at all participating school (preliminary scoring); (2) enhancement of the differentiability of the scores to improve classification of schools; (3) purification of the distinction between schools and selection of those who stand out.

For each staff member included in the list of interviewees and protagonists, an overall statistical description of her or his degree of empathy at school was outlined. The highest of the four ratings related to this person was taken as representing his empathy input in the eyes of each of the assessors (colleagues and pupils) who have made the ratings. Based on an overall content analysis of the interviewees’ verbal comments, the following order of the four cells included in the original model was adopted. Cell 1 implies an optimal approach which integrates decree and application; Cell 2 represents a focus on application; Cell 3 represents a focus on declarations without sufficient application; naturally, Cell 4 received the lowest rank. There were quite a few cases where the highest ratings of the same protagonist did not match, i.e., they fell in different cells. Consequently, an 11-point scale was developed (see Table 2). Based on this scale, two scores were produced for each protagonist, to summarize the assessments from the two sources—teachers and pupils.

Table 2 A scale of empathy scores produced on the basis of the original model (Table 1)

Score Criterion

10 The optimal cell (Cell 1) was chosen 9 The highest ratings appeared in Cell 1 and Cell 2 8 The highest ratings appeared in Cell 1 and Cell 3

7 The highest rating(s) appeared in Cell 2 6 The highest ratings appeared in Cell 2 and Cell 3 5 The highest rating(s) appeared in Cell 3 4 The highest ratings appeared in Cells 1 and Cell 4 3 The highest ratings appeared in Cell 2 and Cell 4 2 The highest ratings appeared in Cell 3 and Cell 4

1 The highest rating(s) appeared in Cell 4 0 The set of ratings appeared nonsensical

Educational figures as models for empathetic communication at school: An exploratory examination of an integrative assessment model

The results of the first stage of statistical arrangement enabled the production of empathy scores on an 11-point scale for each assessor in each school. To enable an integrated school score, the following procedure was enacted: Each school has received one score on the preliminary 11-point scale, i.e., the scale-point of the model (majority; at least two assessors from one source—teachers or pupils) number of individual scores (teachers + pupils). It was found that 31 schools (almost 1/3 of the participating schools) were located on the highest degree, i.e., the model score of assessors from each of these schools was 10. The remaining schools were distributed along the upper part of the original 11-point scale. Naturally, the search for schools which deserve the Rabin Centre prize had to concentrate on the upper group of 31 schools (25 of them were elementary—22 Jewish and 3 Arab—5 (Jewish) high schools and one school of special education).

A purified procedure was constructed to combine the ratings of both sources: The ratio of the number of assessors, teachers and pupils, that their ratings were transformed to the score of 10 (numerator) divided by the entire number of assessors in the given school (denominator). The descriptive statistics for the 25 elementary schools in the top category of 31 schools were as follows: inter-quartile range of combined scores = 0.28 (0.92-0.64), median = 0.83, mean = 0.80. For the five high schools, the range = 0.60 (0.93-0.33), median = 0.69, mean = 0.71, and the combined score of the special education school is 0.70.