Élaboration et processus de validation de l’Échelle d’évaluation des difficultés aux études de cycles supérieurs (EDECS) : étude préliminaire

Lian Boulet, France Landry, G. Goupil
{"title":"Élaboration et processus de validation de l’Échelle d’évaluation des difficultés aux études de cycles supérieurs (EDECS) : étude préliminaire","authors":"Lian Boulet, France Landry, G. Goupil","doi":"10.7202/1090464ar","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Many graduate students encounter challenges in their academic formation for which they consult university support services. The first aim of this study is to conduct a literature review of the main difficulties encountered. A classification of the latter, by content analysis, reveals nine categories. From this preliminary classification, a scale screening these difficulties, the EDECS, was constructed for graduate students support services. The exploratory factor analysis of the EDECS with 500 students grouped the nine initial categories of difficulties into four subscales, thus modifying the preliminary classification. The use of the test-retest method among 188 participants revealed good temporal stability. Various proofs of validity (content, internal structure and correlation between variables) were obtained. The conclusion offers suggestions for using the EDECS by student support services and discusses clinical considerations. Many graduate students encounter challenges in their academic formation for which they consult university support services. The first aim of this study is to conduct a literature review of the main difficulties encountered. A classification of the latter, by content analysis, reveals nine categories. From this preliminary classification, a scale screening these difficulties, the EDECS, was constructed for graduate students support services. The exploratory factor analysis of the EDECS with 500 students grouped the nine initial categories of difficulties into four subscales, thus modifying the preliminary classification. The use of the test-retest method among 188 participants revealed good temporal stability. Various proofs of validity (content, internal structure and correlation between variables) were obtained. The conclusion offers suggestions for using the EDECS by student support services and discusses clinical considerations.","PeriodicalId":90014,"journal":{"name":"Mesure et evaluation en education","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mesure et evaluation en education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7202/1090464ar","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Many graduate students encounter challenges in their academic formation for which they consult university support services. The first aim of this study is to conduct a literature review of the main difficulties encountered. A classification of the latter, by content analysis, reveals nine categories. From this preliminary classification, a scale screening these difficulties, the EDECS, was constructed for graduate students support services. The exploratory factor analysis of the EDECS with 500 students grouped the nine initial categories of difficulties into four subscales, thus modifying the preliminary classification. The use of the test-retest method among 188 participants revealed good temporal stability. Various proofs of validity (content, internal structure and correlation between variables) were obtained. The conclusion offers suggestions for using the EDECS by student support services and discusses clinical considerations. Many graduate students encounter challenges in their academic formation for which they consult university support services. The first aim of this study is to conduct a literature review of the main difficulties encountered. A classification of the latter, by content analysis, reveals nine categories. From this preliminary classification, a scale screening these difficulties, the EDECS, was constructed for graduate students support services. The exploratory factor analysis of the EDECS with 500 students grouped the nine initial categories of difficulties into four subscales, thus modifying the preliminary classification. The use of the test-retest method among 188 participants revealed good temporal stability. Various proofs of validity (content, internal structure and correlation between variables) were obtained. The conclusion offers suggestions for using the EDECS by student support services and discusses clinical considerations.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
研究生学习困难量表(EDECS)的开发和验证过程:初步研究
许多研究生在他们的学术形成中遇到挑战,他们咨询大学的支持服务。本研究的第一个目的是对遇到的主要困难进行文献综述。通过内容分析,将后者分类为九类。根据这一初步分类,构建了一个筛选这些困难的量表,即EDECS,用于研究生支持服务。对500名学生的EDECS进行探索性因子分析,将最初的9类困难分为4个子量表,从而修正了初步分类。在188名参与者中使用测试-重测试方法显示出良好的时间稳定性。得到了各种效度证明(内容、内部结构和变量之间的相关性)。结论提出了学生支持服务使用EDECS的建议,并讨论了临床注意事项。许多研究生在他们的学术形成中遇到挑战,他们咨询大学的支持服务。本研究的第一个目的是对遇到的主要困难进行文献综述。通过内容分析,将后者分类为九类。根据这一初步分类,构建了一个筛选这些困难的量表,即EDECS,用于研究生支持服务。对500名学生的EDECS进行探索性因子分析,将最初的9类困难分为4个子量表,从而修正了初步分类。在188名参与者中使用测试-重测试方法显示出良好的时间稳定性。得到了各种效度证明(内容、内部结构和变量之间的相关性)。结论提出了学生支持服务使用EDECS的建议,并讨论了临床注意事项。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Contribution à l’évaluation de l’efficacité des dispositifs de remédiation Le palmarès des écoles secondaires en question Un goût de lire bien mesuré. Élaboration et mise à l’essai d’une échelle d’attitudes envers la lecture L’évaluation des innovations pédagogiques : quelles modalités de coopération entre les différents acteurs ? Évaluation des connaissances des patients diabétiques par les cartes conceptuelles : approche méthodologique
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1