The convergent and discriminant validity of NSSE scalelet scores

Journal of College Student Development

Volumn 47, Issue 5, 2006, Pages 550-563

  Pike, Gary R ^a  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33749380545     PISSN: 08975264     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1353/csd.2006.0061     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Angoff, W. H. (1988). Validity: An evolving concept. In H. Wainer & H. Braun (Eds.), Test validity (pp. 19-32). Hiilsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
2. Astin, A. W. (1984). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. Journal of College Student Personnel, 25, 297-307.
3. Astin, A. W. (1985). Involvement: The cornerstone of excellence. Change, 17(4), 35-39.
4. Banta, T. W. (2002). A call for transformation. In T. Banta (Ed.), Building a scholarship of assessment (pp. 284-292). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
5. Banta, T. W., & Pike, G. R. (1989). Methods for evaluating assessment instruments. Research in Higher Education, 30, 455-470.
6. Brennan, R. L. (1983). Elements ofgeneralizability theory, Iowa City, IA: ACT.
7. Campbell, D. T. (1960). Recommendations for APA test standards regarding construct, trait, or discriminant validity. American Psychologist, 15, 546-553.
8. Campbell, D. T, & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validity by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56, 81-105.
9. Cronbach, L. J. (1971). Test validation. In R. L. Thorndike (Ed.), Educational measurement (2nd ed., pp. 443-507). Washington, DC: American Council on Education.
10. Cronbach, L. J., Gleser, G. C., Nanda, H., & Rajaratnam, N. (1972). The dependability of behavioral measurements: Theory of generalizability for scores and profiles. New York: Wiley.
11. El-Khawas, E. (2003, August). Using NSSE data for assessment and institutional improvement. Documenting effective educational practices: National roundtable series (Issue 5). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research.
12. Ewell, P. T. (1991). To capture the ineffable: New forms of assessment in higher education. In G. Grant (Ed.), Review of research in education (Vol. 17, pp. 75-126). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
13. Ewell, P. T. (2002). An emerging scholarship: A brief history of assessment. In T. Banta (Ed.), Building a scholarship of assessment (pp. 3-25). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
14. Fiske, D. W. (1982). Convergent-discriminant validation measurements in research strategies. In L. H. Kidder (Ed.), Forms of validity research. (New Directions for the Methodology of Social and Behavioral Science Series, No. 12, pp. 77-92). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
15. Gellin, A. (2003). The effect of undergraduate student involvement on critical thinking: A meta-analysis of the literature, 1991 -2000. Journal of College Student Development, 44, 746-762.
16. Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research. (2004). Student engagement: Pathways to collegiate success. Bloomington, IN: Author.
17. Kane, M. T., Gillmore, G. M, & Crooks, T. J. (1976). Student evaluations of teaching: The generalizability of class means. Journal of Educational Measurement, 13, 171-183.
18. Kezar, A. (2002, December). Faculty developers using the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) to be change agents. Documenting effective educational practices: National roundtable series (Issue 1). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research.
19. Kezar, A. (2003, June). Student affairs administrators: Building collaborations with students and academic affairs for institutional improvement. Documenting effective educational practices: National roundtable series (Issue 3). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research.
20. Kuh, G. D. (2001). The National Survey of Student Engagement: Conceptual framework and overview of psychometric properties. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research.
21. Kuh, G. D. (2003). What we're learning about student engagement from NSSE. Change, 35(2), 24-32.
22. Kuh, G. D., Gonyea, R. M., & Palmer, M. (2001). The disengaged commuter student: Fact or fiction? Commuter Perspectives, 27(1), 2-5.
23. Kuh, G. D., Gonyea, R. M., & Rodriguez, D. P. (2002). The scholarly assessment of student development. In T. Banta (Ed.), Building a scholarship of assessment (pp. 100-128). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
24. Kuh, G. D., Hu, S., & Vesper, N. (2000). "They shall be known by what they do": An activities-based typology of college students. Journal of College Student Development, 41, 228-244.
25. Kuh, G. D., Schuh, J. H., Whitt, E. J., & Associates. (1991). Involving colleges: Encouraging Student learning and personal development through out-of-class experiences. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
26. Loevinger, J. (1957). Objective tests as instruments of psychological theory. Psychological Reports, 3, 635-694.
27. Messick, S. (1989). Validity. In R. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement (3rd ed., pp. 13-103). New York: Macmillan.
28. Pace, C. R. (1980). Measuring the quality of student effort. Current Issues in Higher Education, 2, 10-16.
29. Pace, C. R. (1984). Measuring the quality of college student experiences. Los Angeles: Center for the Study of Evaluation, University of California Los Angeles.
30. Pascarella, E. T., Whitt, E. J., Nora, A., Edison, M., Hagedorn, L. S., & Terenzini, P. T. (1996). What have we learned from the first year of the national study of student learning? Journal of College Student Development, 37, 182-192.
31. Peterson, M. W., Einarson, M. K., Augustine, C. H., & Vaughan, D. S. (1999). Institutional support for student assessment: Methodology and results of a national survey. Stanford, CA: National Center for Postsecondary Improvement.
32. Pike, G. R. (1989). Background, college experiences, and the ACT-COMP exam: Using construct validity to evaluate assessment instruments. Review of Higher Education, 13, 91-118.
33. Pike, G. R. (1992). The components of construct validity: A comparison of two measures of general education outcomes. Journal of General Education, 41, 130-150.
34. Pike, G. R. (1994). Applications of generalizability theory in higher education assessment research. In J. Smart (Ed.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (Vol. X, pp. 45-87). New York: Agathon.
35. Pike, G. R. (1995). The relationship between self reports of college experiences and achievement test scores. Research in Higher Education, 36, 1-21.
36. Pike, G. R. (2002). Measurement issues in outcomes assessment. In T. Banta (Ed.), Building a scholarship of assessment (pp. 131-147). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
37. Pike, G. R., Kuh, G. D., & Gonyea, R. M. (2003). The relationship between institutional mission and students' involvement and educational outcomes. Research in Higher Education, 44, 243-263.
38. Pike, G. R. (2006). The dependability of NSSE Scalelets for college- and department-level assessment. Research in Higher Education, 47, 177-195.
39. Shavelson, R. J., & Webb, N. M. (1991). Generalizability theory: A primer. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
40. Thissen, D., & Mislevy, R. L. (1990). Testing algorithms. In J. Wainer (Ed.), Computerized adaptive testing: A primer (pp. 103-136). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
41. Wainer, H., & Kiely, G. L. (1987). Item clusters and computer adaptive testing: A case for testlets. Journal of Educational Measurement, 24, 185-201.
42. Wainer, H., Dorans, N. J., Green, B. E., Mislevy, R. J., Steinberg, L., & Thissen, D. (1990). Future challenges. In H. Wainer (Ed.), Computerized adaptive testing: A frimer (pp. 233-271). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.