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

ated on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (never) to 5 (frequent) on how often the professor
exhibits the given teaching behavior. For instance, for the behavior of 'provides constructive
feedback,' the question would state, “Writes comments on returned work, answers students’
questions, and gives advice on test taking” (Keeley et al., 2006, p. 85). In the case of SoTL scales
such as the TBC (or check out The Teacher Immediacy Scale by Gorham, 1988) these measures
are, albeit indirect records of specific behaviors, but allow researchers to approximate specific
behavioral outcomes.
Third, to mitigate some of the pitfalls with self-report scales is to use SoTL scales that are
scenario based. For instance, Berry, West, and Denehey (1989) developed a self-report SoTL
scale to measure self-efficacy for memory tasks called the Memory for Self-Efficacy
Questionnaire (MSEQ). The MSEQ has been widely used and retains acceptable validity and
reliability (Berry et al., 1989; West, Thorn & Bagwell, 2003). The measure is comprised of 40
confidence ratings on 10 memory scenarios. Within each scenario the first question describes
the simplest memory task for the scenario then the 4 th question describes the most difficult
memory task. Individuals are asked to give their confidence rating (0-100%) on their ability to
successfully accomplish the memory task. For example, in the MSEQ individuals are given a
scenario about their ability to remember a grocery list. The first question (which is the easiest
memory task) would state, “If I heard it twice, I could remember 2 items from a friend’s grocery
list of the 12 items, without taking any list with me to the store” (Berry et al., 1989, p. 713).
Whereas the most difficult memory task would state, “If I heard it twice, I could remember 12
items from a friend’s grocery list of 12 items, without taking any list with me to the store” (p.
713). Confidence ratings are then totaled for each memory scenario (e.g., grocery list, phone
numbers, pictures, location, words, etc.). As you can see, SoTL scales such as the MSEQ are selfreport,
however they are rooted in past performance and actual real-life examples of what
students or teachers may experience. The benefit of these types of measures is that they
attempt to obtain external validity by putting the respondents in real-life scenarios.
In SoTL research, self-reports are inevitable and do serve a purpose. However, we are not
cryptozoologists, we are SoTL scholars. So in order to debunk the mythical creatures such as
Bigfoot, it is important that we complement self-report measures with behavioral measures
and/or select and create SoTL scales that are rooted in actual behavior.
Measuring Yeti’s Metacognition and Use of Learning Strategies
Do you think Yeti, aka the abdominal snowman, thinks about thinking or employs effective
learning strategies? Likely—not! But if he did, how would we know? For that matter, how do
we know our students’ metacognition and use of learning strategies? We could use the
previously described MAI by Schraw and Dennison (1994), but it is 52-items long and a little
theoretically dated (e.g., metacognitive awareness is more than knowledge and regulation of
cognition). If you are combining this with other measures for a study, you run the risk of getting
participant fatigue and consequential response sets (e.g., answering 5 to all questions or
playing connect the dots). If you want something shorter you could use the Need for Cognition
Scale (NCS) by Cacioppo, Petty, Feinstein, and Jarvis (1996). The NCS is a personality measure of
metacognition intended to measure the extent to which an individual might need to engage in
178