A COMPENDIUM OF SCALES for use in the SCHOLARSHIP OF TEACHING AND LEARNING

Recommendations

Info

some, or only one, and still gain insight regarding aspects of students' computer anxiety (see Schult & McIntosh, 2004 for a SoTL study in which only the state anxiety subscale was used). One possible disadvantage to the CALM measure is that a few items may be outdated (e.g., questions measuring comfort using a mouse or printing documents) due to the prevalence of computers in most people’s everyday lives. However, one other well-validated computer anxiety scale exists and may serve as an excellent alternative if the CALM does not meet an instructor's needs. The Computer Anxiety Scale (CAS; Lester, Yang, & James, 2005) contains six items and participants respond using a 6-point agreement anchor (strongly agree to strongly disagree). The six items load onto a single underlying factor of computer anxiety (Chronbach’s αs > .74 across multiple samples). Items such as, "I feel confident and relaxed whiling working on a computer" and "I can usually manage to solve computer problems by myself" make up the scale. For instructors solely seeking to assess the affective components of computer anxiety, we recommend the state subscale of the CALM; but for researchers seeking to assess cognitive components, the other four subscales of the CALM or the CAS offer practical solutions. Math Anxiety Psychological statistics professors often quip that teaching psychological statistics is one part teaching math and one part anxiety mitigation. It comes as no surprise that several scales exist to measure students' self-reported anxieties toward math. An early, yet still widely used, measure is the Math Anxiety Scale (Betz, 1978; Fennema & Sherman, 1976). Betz (1978) rewrote 10 items from the Mathematics Attitudes Scale (Fennema & Sherman, 1976) with the goal of assessing college students' math anxiety. Participants respond to these 10 items on a 5- point agreement scale (strongly disagree to strongly agree). The items offer good reliability (split-half coefficient of .92; Betz, 1978) and measure worry about solving math problems, feelings of tension during math exams or when thinking of difficult math problems, and loss of clear thinking when working with math. Another widely used measure is the Math Anxiety Rating Scale (MARS-R; Plake & Parker, 1982). Although the original MARS-R contained 24 items, Hopko (2003) conducted a re-validation study and reduced the measure to 12 items. Participants respond to items using a 4-point scale from 0 (no anxiety) to 4 (high anxiety). Both the original and revised versions consist of two subscales: Learning Math Anxiety and Math Evaluation Anxiety. Both subscales have good reliability (Learning Math Anxiety, Cronbach’s α = .87; Math Evaluation Anxiety, α = .85; Hopko, 2003). By assessing students' trait or state feelings before engaging in an academic task, instructors can assess whether some of the positive well-being constructs buffer against the negative effects of test or computer anxiety. For instance, students with high math anxiety tend to perform more poorly on math exams, except when they possess high metacognitive skills (Legg & Locker, 2009). The high metacognitive skill allows these students to compensate for and overcome potentially debilitating math anxiety. Instructors can also use these scales to 142
demonstrate peoples' varying levels of anxiety (e.g., some people may score high on math anxiety but low on computer anxiety). Conclusion In sum, a variety of scales exist to measure the positive and negative aspects of trait and state well-being, and these assessments could serve as either predictors or dependent variables in research projects for SoTL scholars. Importantly, most of the scales are self-report and brief, and are therefore highly convenient for use within the classroom. In addition, although we reported some examples of instructors exploring well-being in the classroom, we also pointed out many new ways in which SoTL scores can contribute to this burgeoning literature. Lastly, not only can the scales themselves be informative to students’ understanding of research constructs, but they can also help instructors understand and promote intangible emotional characteristics that might help students thrive. 143
Page 1 and 2:
A COMPENDIUM OF SCALES for use in t
Page 3 and 4:
Table of Contents Chapter 1: Introd
Page 5 and 6:
Chapter 1: Introduction Rajiv S. Jh
Page 7 and 8:
and boredom; whereas the former inc
Page 9 and 10:
References Bishop-Clark, C. & Dietz
Page 11 and 12:
Chapter 2: Best Practices in Scale
Page 13 and 14:
o Participants respond to items suc
Page 15 and 16:
- Be aware of whether the scale is
Page 17 and 18:
References References marked with a
Page 19 and 20:
*Wielkiewicz, R. M. & Meuwissen, A.
Page 21 and 22:
example, McCabe (2015) examined the
Page 23 and 24:
psychometrically sound tool. Howeve
Page 25 and 26:
a history of the authors’ work do
Page 27 and 28:
*Oleson, K. C., Poehlmann, K. M., Y
Page 29 and 30:
Chapter 4: A Primer on Scale Develo
Page 31 and 32:
scales or develop new ones. In eith
Page 33 and 34:
found their 40-item measure could b
Page 35 and 36:
eflect overall teacher behaviors or
Page 37 and 38:
Although there is some variability
Page 39 and 40:
and/or do not correlate with instru
Page 41 and 42:
Fraley, R. C., & Vazire, S. (2014).
Page 43 and 44:
Streiner, D. L. (2003). Starting at
Page 45 and 46:
Psychology, 36 of the 47 articles (
Page 47 and 48:
Assessing and Reporting Validity In
Page 49 and 50:
Grades Another common source of alr
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
model of collaborative undergraduat
Page 55 and 56:
Chapter 6: Measuring Learning and S
Page 57 and 58:
joins a new team to teach them abou
Page 59 and 60:
Summative Assessments Summative Rub
Page 61 and 62:
programs. In a national survey of p
Page 63 and 64:
Course Outcomes Scale Centra and Ga
Page 65 and 66:
discuss The Motivated Strategies fo
Page 67 and 68:
The Motivated Strategies for Learni
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Hacker, D. J., Bol, L., & Bahbabani
Page 73 and 74:
Stoloff, M. L., & Feeney, K. J. (20
Page 75 and 76:
interpretation of analogies is an a
Page 77 and 78:
Similar difficulties in accurately
Page 79 and 80:
How do we balance the need for effi
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
*Halpern, D. F. (2010). Halpern Cri
Page 85 and 86:
Appendix: A Compendium of General C
Page 87 and 88:
Chapter 8: Student Engagement Towar
Page 89 and 90:
particular items. Indeed, a point o
Page 91 and 92: employing the SCEQ have shown other
Page 93 and 94: one of eight achievement emotions m
Page 95 and 96: Recent efforts (Saddler, Sonnert, H
Page 97 and 98: References References marked with a
Page 99 and 100: 64, 847-860. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.
Page 101 and 102: *Schaufeli, W.B., Salanova, M., Gon
Page 103 and 104: course. Pretest and posttest survey
Page 105 and 106: Perceptions 7 Problem-Solving 1 Sat
Page 107 and 108: Culture and Issues Knowledge of Cur
Page 109 and 110: Civic Attitudes and Skills Question
Page 111 and 112: Scale of Service-Learning Involveme
Page 113 and 114: engagement and psychological measur
Page 115 and 116: Giles, D. E., & Eyler, J. (2013). T
Page 117 and 118: Appendix A: Research Measures for M
Page 119 and 120: Robby, M.A. -CASQ -SAT/9 Scores -¹
Page 121 and 122: Steinberg, K. S., Hatcher, J. A., B
Page 123 and 124: Chapter 10: Measuring Individual Di
Page 125 and 126: either unnecessary or is referenced
Page 127 and 128: Park, 2005). The merit of the instr
Page 129 and 130: Similar factor structures were prod
Page 133 and 134: Chapter 11: Measuring Well-Being in
Page 135 and 136: items, and the PANAS 44 items, and
Page 137 and 138: Meaning in Life The Meaning in Life
Page 139 and 140: future,” using a 5-point scale (1
Page 141: Domain-Specific Stress and Anxiety
Page 145 and 146: Gehlbach, H. (2015). Seven survey s
Page 147 and 148: Ritchie, R. A., Meca, A., Madrazo,
Page 149 and 150: Chapter 12: Assessing Professor-Stu
Page 151 and 152: ends with some unanswered questions
Page 153 and 154: positively about their professors
Page 155 and 156: The PSRS underwent further validati
Page 157 and 158: help or hinder the graduate student
Page 159 and 160: Komarraju, M. (2013). Ideal teacher
Page 161 and 162: Chapter 13: Effective Tools for Ass
Page 163 and 164: offer guidance based on their exper
Page 165 and 166: The Original TBC Study Our approach
Page 167 and 168: student/faculty rating with critica
Page 169 and 170: eveals that five qualities (knowled
Page 173 and 174: *Wann, P.D. (2001, January). Facult
Page 175 and 176: Nessie the Mythical Loch Ness Monst
Page 177 and 178: components of knowledge of cognitio
Page 179 and 180: a cognitive activity (Cacioppo et a
Page 181 and 182: teacher? In other words, how do we
Page 183 and 184: Christopher (2015) also suggests th
Page 185 and 186: Kirk, C., Busler, J., Keeley, J., &
show all

A COMPENDIUM OF SCALES for use in the SCHOLARSHIP OF TEACHING AND LEARNING

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?