1) Tokyo university of Marine science and Technology 4-5-7 Konan Minato-ku Tokyo (108-8477)

2) Tokai University 4-1-1 Kitakaname, Hiratsuka-shi, Kanagawa(259-1292)

Japan Outdoor Education Journal 22-2 31-39 (2019)

30

1) 108-8477 4-5-7

2) 259-1292 4-1-1

1.

28 1)

2008 12

2018 3 3

4 5) 6

217

This research aimed at developing a “Short Form Ocean Literacy Evaluation Scale” using the existing ocean literacy survey for easier implementation for water activities. Firstly, since the existing ocean literacy survey (9 factors 36 items) was an evaluation scale developed through cluster analysis, confirmatory factor analysis was used to reconstruct it into 8 factors (32 items). Next, 5 out of the 8 reconstructed factors where the discriminant validity was not approved were thought to be able to be integrated and reconstructed into 4 factors. This resulted in CFI, discriminant validity and internal consistency that were either above standard values or deemed to be within the tolerance range. Furthermore, the evaluation of the factor 4 (12 items) targeted at instructors showed similar results, reinforcing its reliability and validity. Therefore the “Short Form Ocean Literacy Evaluation Scale” was successfully de-veloped to be a more convenient alternative to the existing ocean literacy survey. Key words : ocean literacy, development of the standard, water activities

The Development of a Short Form Ocean Literacy Evaluation Scale

Hisayo TOMAGO1) Hideo MATSUMOTO2) Koichi CHIASHI1)

31

3

8) School Water WiseIKR

9)

10)

11)

CHEQ EQEQ

12)

20057 44

13)

19( )

14)

15 16)

49 36

17

F1. F2. F3.

F4. F5. F6.

F7. F8.

F9. 9 M1.

M2. M3. M4. 4

H1. H2. 2 36

18 Tomago and Chiashi19)

3 4

32

4

Chiashi and Sasaki18)

2.

9 36 6

158135 124

11 50.0 12.3

931 841591 250 19.4 1.2

976 715 261

2/df2.00 3.00 CFI 0.90

RMSEA 0.08 20)

AVE 0.50AVE

AVE20)21) Cronbach

0.8 22) IBMSPSSV22J AMOSV22J

3.3.1

F1. F2. F3. F4.

F5. F6.

F7. F8. F9.

99

F2. F3.

F2.

F3. F2_3. 8 32

AVE

-1 2/df=5.62CFI=0.92 RMSEA=0.07 2/df

CFIRMSEA -2

AVE F4. F8.

F5. F6.

F7. F6.

F8. F7.

F9. F5.

F6. F7.

33

5

F8. F9.

-3 8Cronbach

0.8-1

8 32CFI RMSEA

2/df 2/df=5.62

2/df 23)24)

CFI RMSEAF5.

F6. F7. F8.

F9. 5

34

6

8 32

3.2

8 32

F5. F6. F7. F8.

F9. 5

F1. F2_3.

F4. F5_F9. 4

35

7

5 4-4

4 162/df =7.70 CFI=0.93 RMSEA=0.08

-2 CFI RMSEA

2/df

823)24)

AVE 0.5 AVE

-5Cronbach 0.8

-4 9 36

4 16

F5. F6. F7.

F8. F9.

4F5_F9.

F5_F9. 3 12

-62/df =7.10

CFI=0.95 RMSEA=0.08 -2 CFI RMSEA

2/df

23)24)

AVE 0.5AVE

-7Cronbach

0.8

36

8

-6 4.

9 36 6

9

36

99

F2. F3. F2_3.

8 32

936 6

8 325 F1.

F2_3. F4. F5_F9

4

54

37

9

CFI RMSEA2/df

Cronbach

4 F5_F93 12

CFIRAMSEA 2/df

9 36

3 12 6

-8

1 2007 http://elaws.e-gov.go.jp/search/elaws-Search/elaws_search/lsg0500/de-tail?lawId=419AC1000000033&open-erCode=1. 2018-9-12

2 2008 1http://www8.cao.go.jp/ocean/poli-cies/plan/plan01/pdf/plan01.pdf 2018-9-12

3 2018 3

http://www8.cao.go.jp/ocean/poli-cies/plan/plan03/pdf/plan03.pdf 2018-9-12

4 2005

5 13-23. 5 (2011):

2011 UMI68-75.

6 20071:

21 5 111-115.

7 2011 21(

) 6-7.

8 2005

82 59-70.

9 2006

114 229-234 10

2000

2746-47.

11 2012

1 1 20 12 Francesca Cava et al .(2005) Science

Content and Standards for Ocean Liter-acy : A Report on Ocean Literacy, Ocean

38

10

Literacy Network, 50. 13 Ocean Literacy version 2.

http://www.coexploration.org/oceanlit-eracy/documents/OceanLitChart.pdf

2018-6-19 14 21 2009

19

( ) 137-140. 15 2009

27-35. 16 2009

12112 113.

17 201162

21. 18 Koichi CHIASHI, Tsuyoshi SASAKI

2012 Trainer’s views of Indicators Comprising Ocean Literacy

Japan Outdoor Education Journal 15 2 13-19.

19 Hisayo Tomago , Koichi Chiashi 2015Effects of Practical Marine Training in University on Ocean Literacy

4 1 3-11. 20 Joe F. Hair Jr., William C. Black, Babin,

Barry J. BabinB & Rolph E. Anderson2010 Multivariate data analysis

(7th ed.). Upper saddle River, New Jer-sey: Prentice Hall

21 Claes Fornell, David F. Larcker 1981Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and meas-urement error, Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50.

22 2010 SPSS208-217.

23 1998172.

24 2005119.

2018 10 17 2019 1 18

39