The Convergent and Discriminant Validity of NSSE Scalelet Scores
By Gary R. Pike. 2006
135 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Faculty and administrators are more likely to take responsibility for student learning and development if they believe that assessment data represent their students and identify specific actions for improvement. An earlier study found that NSSE scalelets provide dependable metrics for assessing student engagement at the university, college, and department levels. Building on the earlier study, the findings of the current research indicate that the NSSE scalelets have greater explanatory power and provide richer detail than the NSSE benchmarks.
Subfields: Education
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e8be8b80a733b5e04e1d85f1a788f351b5d4b556
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Education
- E. Kahu
- Corbin M. Campbell
- A. Cabrera
- K. Webber
- George D. Kuh
- John C. Beachboard
- Wenling Li
- Martine Robinson Beachboard
Citations in the corpus
- Student engagement evidence summary (2010, unknown): “…Goodsell, Maher and Tinto, 1992; Feldman and Newcomb, 1969; Kuh, 1995; Kuh et al., 2005; Kuh, Pace and Vesper, 1997; Kuh, Whitt and Strange, 1989; LaNasa, Cabrera and Trangsrud, 2009; Pace, 1990, 1995; Pascarella, 1985; Pascarella and Terenzini, 1991, 2005; Pike, 2006a, 2006b; Tinto, 1987, 1993) .”
- Framing student engagement in higher education (2013, methodology): “Other scales and dimensions, developed through factor analysis, have been suggested (LaNasa, Cabrera, and Trangsrud 2009; Pike 2006).”
- Student and Faculty Member Engagement in Undergraduate Research (2013, background): “…participation in UR has been found to positively affect analytic and critical thinking (Bauer and Bennett 2008; Kardash 2000; Kuh et al. 2007; Pike 2006; Volkwein and Carbone 1994), increase academic achievement and retention (Cole and Espinoza 2008; Ishiyama 2002; Nagda et al. 1998),…”
- Student engagement literature review (2010, unknown): “…2000; Goodsell, Maher & Tinto 1992; Feldman & Newcomb 1969; Kuh 1995; Kuh, Kinzie, Schuh & Whitt 2005; Kuh, Pace & Vesper 1997; Kuh, Whitt & Strange 1989; LaNasa, Cabrera & Trangsrud 2009; Pace 1990, 1995; Pascarella 1985; Pascarella & Terenzini 1991, 2005; Pike 2006a, 2006b; Tinto 1987, 1993) .”
- Cohorts and Relatedness: Self-Determination Theory as an Explanation of How Learning Communities Affect Educational Outcomes (2011, methodology): “As have other researchers, we adapted several previously reported scales to sharpen the conceptual focus of constructs relevant to the needs of our study (Carle et al. 2009; Carini et al. 2006; Gordon et al. 2008; Kuh 2001; Pike 2006a, b). We examined the psychometric properties of multi-item scal”
- Persistence, Engagement, and Migration in Engineering Programs (2008, background): “Scales are clusters of items that are conceptually related and that also have respectable Cronbach alphas (Pike, 2006).”
- How Sound Is NSSE?: Investigating the Psychometric Properties of NSSE at a Public, Research-Extensive Institution (2011, methodology): “Pike (2006) used 2001 NSSE senior data to create 12 scalelets that measured engagement and reported that some NSSE scalelets were positively associated with student self-reports of gains in general education and practical skills.”
- Comparing the Undergraduate Experience of Engineers to All Other Majors: Significant Differences are Programmatic (2010, background): “Scales and their reliabilities for first-years (FY) and seniors (SR) are shown in Table 2 (Pike, 2006a and 2006b).”
- What Student Affairs Professionals Need to Know About Student Engagement (2009, background): “…2005, 2006, 2007, 2008; Nelson Laird, & Kuh, 2005; Nelson Laird, Shoup, Kuh, & Schwarz, 2008; Outcalt & Skewes-Cox, 2002; Pascarella et al., 2006; Pike, 2003, 2006a, 2006b; Pike & Kuh, 2005, 2006; Pike, Kuh, & Gonyea, 2003, 2007; Pike, Smart, Kuh, & Hayek, 2006; Umbach & Kuh, 2006; Zhao, Carini,…”