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

Recommendations

Info

Proficiency Profile Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal This multiple choice instrument equates to the former Academic Profile, and yields a critical thinking proficiency level (Level I, II, or III). Available in standard form (108 questions) or abbreviated form (36 questions). Students are assessed on decision-making skills and judgment; test takers classified as low, average, or high in critical thinking ability. Using Form S, 40 self-report items are used; higher scores indicate greater critical thinking abilities. 86
Chapter 8: Student Engagement Toward Coursework: Measures, Considerations, and Future Directions Kevin L. Zabel and Amy Heger University of Tennessee Student engagement is the fuel that drives the potential for success in college courses. Just as a car cannot operate without fuel, a lack of student interest or engagement hinders the beneficial impact of class-facilitated experiences. Although multiple operational definitions of student engagement exist, student engagement is broadly defined as the quantity and quality of physical and psychological energy that students invest in the college experience (Astin, 1999) or the extent to which students take part in educationally effective practices (Kuh, 2003). Regardless of construct definition, student engagement relates to academic achievement and several important learning outcomes. For example, student engagement is linked to persistence among first- and second-year college students (Kuh, Cruce, Shoup, Kinzie & Gonyea, 2008), retention and reduced drop-out rates (Finn, 1989), achievement (Newmann, 1992), grade point average (Carini, Kuh, & Klein, 2006), and a plethora of other positive outcomes (see Janosz, 2012 for a review). The importance of student engagement in courses was dramatically showcased in a field experiment where an engagement activity that connected science to students’ personal lives increased student interest in class, as well as class performance, especially among students with low expectations of success (Hulleman & Harackiewicz, 2009). Although the importance of student engagement and interest in classroom material seems established, less founded are psychometrically sound and well-validated measures to accurately and reliably assess student engagement and interest toward classroom materials. Student engagement is an attitude that, like all attitudes, varies among individuals in terms of strength and valence. Past scholars and researchers have utilized a multifaceted operationalization (Fredricks, Blumenfeld, & Paris, 2004; Furlong, Whipple, St. Jean, Simental, Soliz, & Punthuna, 2003; Jimerson, Campos, & Greif, 2003) to define student engagement. Specifically, student engagement consists of affective (e.g., relationships with peers and teachers, emotions), behavioral (e.g., effort, student participation), and cognitive (e.g., investment, personal goals, autonomy) components (Appleton, Christenson, & Furlong, 2008; Fredricks et al., 2004; Furlong et al., 2003; Jimerson et al., 2003). The distinction between affective, behavioral, and cognitive components of student engagement becomes clear when examining how each may importantly impact one another and lead to specific types of longterm consequences. For instance, a reduced sense of belonging within a school or classroom (affective component of student engagement) may lead to withdrawing from school activities (behavioral component), which in turn leads to cognitive perceptions (“school is not important to my self-concept”) that have negative long-term consequences. The multidimensional nature of student engagement has led to divergences in the measurement and operationalization of the construct. Indeed, a lack of a unifying theme in defining and thus measuring the construct is a problem elaborated on by many (e.g., Reschly & Christenson, 2012). Some education researchers have called for a more precise 87
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: References References marked with a
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 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 83 and 84: *Halpern, D. F. (2010). Halpern Cri
Page 85: Appendix: A Compendium of General C
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 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 and 142:
Domain-Specific Stress and Anxiety
Page 143 and 144:
demonstrate peoples' varying levels
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 171 and 172:
References References marked with a
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?