修订后的双因素研究过程问卷的Rasch分析:一项验证性研究。

Journal of applied measurement Pub Date : 2018-01-01
Vernon Mogol, Yan Chen, Marcus Henning, Andy Wearn, Jennifer Weller, Jill Yielder, Warwich Bagg
{"title":"修订后的双因素研究过程问卷的Rasch分析:一项验证性研究。","authors":"Vernon Mogol,&nbsp;Yan Chen,&nbsp;Marcus Henning,&nbsp;Andy Wearn,&nbsp;Jennifer Weller,&nbsp;Jill Yielder,&nbsp;Warwich Bagg","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Revised Two-Factor Study Process Questionnaire (R-SPQ-2F) was developed in 1998 using the true score theory to measure students' deep approaches (DA) and surface approaches (SA) to learning. Using Rasch analyses, this study aimed to 1) validate the R-SPQ-2F's two-factor structure, and 2) explore whether the full scale (FS), after reverse scoring responses to SA items, could measure learning approach as a uni-dimensional construct. University students (N = 327) completed an online version of the R-SPQ-2F. The researchers validated the R-SPQ-2F by showing that items on the three rating scales (DA, SA, and FS) had acceptable fit; both DA and FS, but not SA, showed acceptable targeting function; and all three scales had acceptable reliabilities (0.74 - 0.79). The DA and SA scales, not the FS, satisfied the unidimensionality requirement, supporting the claim that student approaches to learning are represented by DA and SA as separate constructs.</p>","PeriodicalId":73608,"journal":{"name":"Journal of applied measurement","volume":"19 4","pages":"428-441"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Rasch Analysis of the Revised Two-Factor Study Process Questionnaire: A Validation Study.\",\"authors\":\"Vernon Mogol,&nbsp;Yan Chen,&nbsp;Marcus Henning,&nbsp;Andy Wearn,&nbsp;Jennifer Weller,&nbsp;Jill Yielder,&nbsp;Warwich Bagg\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The Revised Two-Factor Study Process Questionnaire (R-SPQ-2F) was developed in 1998 using the true score theory to measure students' deep approaches (DA) and surface approaches (SA) to learning. Using Rasch analyses, this study aimed to 1) validate the R-SPQ-2F's two-factor structure, and 2) explore whether the full scale (FS), after reverse scoring responses to SA items, could measure learning approach as a uni-dimensional construct. University students (N = 327) completed an online version of the R-SPQ-2F. The researchers validated the R-SPQ-2F by showing that items on the three rating scales (DA, SA, and FS) had acceptable fit; both DA and FS, but not SA, showed acceptable targeting function; and all three scales had acceptable reliabilities (0.74 - 0.79). The DA and SA scales, not the FS, satisfied the unidimensionality requirement, supporting the claim that student approaches to learning are represented by DA and SA as separate constructs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73608,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of applied measurement\",\"volume\":\"19 4\",\"pages\":\"428-441\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of applied measurement\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of applied measurement","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

修订后的双因素学习过程问卷(R-SPQ-2F)是在1998年开发的,使用真分理论来衡量学生的深度方法(DA)和表面方法(SA)的学习。本研究采用Rasch分析,旨在验证R-SPQ-2F的双因子结构,并探讨对SA项目进行反向评分后的完整量表(FS)是否可以作为一个单维结构来衡量学习方法。大学生(N = 327)完成了R-SPQ-2F的在线版本。研究人员通过显示三个评定量表(DA、SA和FS)上的项目具有可接受的拟合来验证R-SPQ-2F;DA和FS均具有良好的靶向功能,SA不具有;三种量表均具有可接受信度(0.74 ~ 0.79)。DA和SA量表满足单维性要求,而不是FS,这支持了学生的学习方法是由DA和SA作为单独的构念来表示的说法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Rasch Analysis of the Revised Two-Factor Study Process Questionnaire: A Validation Study.

The Revised Two-Factor Study Process Questionnaire (R-SPQ-2F) was developed in 1998 using the true score theory to measure students' deep approaches (DA) and surface approaches (SA) to learning. Using Rasch analyses, this study aimed to 1) validate the R-SPQ-2F's two-factor structure, and 2) explore whether the full scale (FS), after reverse scoring responses to SA items, could measure learning approach as a uni-dimensional construct. University students (N = 327) completed an online version of the R-SPQ-2F. The researchers validated the R-SPQ-2F by showing that items on the three rating scales (DA, SA, and FS) had acceptable fit; both DA and FS, but not SA, showed acceptable targeting function; and all three scales had acceptable reliabilities (0.74 - 0.79). The DA and SA scales, not the FS, satisfied the unidimensionality requirement, supporting the claim that student approaches to learning are represented by DA and SA as separate constructs.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Validation of Egalitarian Education Questionnaire using Rasch Measurement Model. Bootstrap Estimate of Bias for Intraclass Correlation. Rasch's Logistic Model Applied to Growth. Psychometric Properties of the General Movement Optimality Score using Rasch Measurement. Rasch Analysis of the Burn-Specific Pain Anxiety Scale: Evidence for the Abbreviated Version.
×
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