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

employing the SCEQ have shown other significant relationships with academic initiatives and
outcomes. For example, participation in student management teams (SMTs) increases course
engagement, and it is through this engagement that SMTs positively influence course
performance (Troisi, 2014). Also, different types of engaged learning activities in college (e.g.
internships, undergraduate research) promote particular factors of engagement from the SCEQ
(Miller, Rycek & Fritson, 2011).
Overall, given its characteristics, the SCEQ may be a useful measure of student engagement
when a particular domain or class is the chief target of interest. Handelsman and colleagues
(2005) mention categories from the macro-level NSSE that they anticipated would parallel
particular SCEQ factors, but they did not collect data to compare the two scales. Future
research should use a longitudinal design to investigate if student scores on the SCEQ across
courses converge to predict overall college engagement on the NSSE. Worrisome aspects of the
scale, however, need to be highlighted. Specifically, no theoretical foundation was articulated
in SCEQ questionnaire item development or regarding a multi-dimensional factor structure.
Reasoning was provided post-hoc for each factor and references of supportive research were
somewhat sparse. The dependent variables chosen to test patterns for convergent and
discriminant validity were one-item measures, which are notorious for being unreliable (e.g.,
Churchill, 1979; Guilford, 1954), so additional rigorous testing of the scale’s psychometric
properties should be pursued. Indeed, the lack of rigorous psychometric testing of teachingrelated
measures is an issue discussed in Chapter 3 of this e-book (Christopher, 2015).
Utrecht Work Engagement Scale-Student (UWES-S).
An additional and more psychometrically rigorous assessment of student engagement has
arisen out of the organizational psychology literature. The UWES-S evolved out of research on
engagement in the workplace (e.g., Schaufeli & Bakker, 2003; Schutte, Toppinen, Kalimo, &
Schaufeli, 2000), and consists of a three-dimensional, 17-item measure of student engagement
(Schaufeli, Salanova, González-Romá, & Bakker, 2002).
Engagement is delineated by three core-dimensions: vigor, dedication, and absorption. Vigor is
operationalized as high levels of energy, devoting effort to one’s work, and mental resilience
and perseverance. Six items are used to assess vigor (e.g., “When I’m doing my work as a
student, I feel bursting with energy”). Dedication is operationalized as a sense of dedication,
significance, enthusiasm, inspiration, pride, and challenge in one’s work. Dedication is assessed
by five items (e.g., “I’m enthusiastic about my studies”). Absorption is operationalized as being
fully concentrated and deeply engrossed in one’s work (Schaufeli et al., 2002, pp. 74).
Absorption is assessed by six items (e.g., “When I am studying, I forget everything else around
me”). Item responses are recorded on a Likert scale from 0 (never) to 6 (always). Recent crossnational
research has confirmed the sound psychometric properties of the UWES-S (Schaufeli,
Martínez, Marques-Pinto, Salanova, & Bakker, 2002; Schaufeli et al., 2002), as well as the
generality of the measurement model across cultures for the absorption and vigor subscales.
Future work should examine if the dimensions structure is consistent across different academic
levels (i.e., elementary, secondary, post-secondary) as well.
91