The Turkish adaptation study of motivated strategies for learning questionnaire (MSLQ) for 12-18 year old children:Results of confirmatory factor analysis 1

Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology

Volumn 7, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 108-117

  Karadeniz, Şirin ^a   Büyüköztürk, Şener ^b   Akgün, Özcan Erkan ^c   Çakmak, Ebru Kiliç ^d   Demirel, Funda ^e  

^a BAHCESEHIR UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

^b BASKENT UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

^c SAKARYA UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

^d GAZI UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

^e Republic of Turkey Prime Ministry   (Turkey)

Author keywords

Adaptation of MSLQ; Confirmatory factor analysis; Learning strategies; Motivation; MSLQ

Indexed keywords

EID: 77952020672     PISSN: None     EISSN: 13036521     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Anderson, J.C., & Gerbing, D. (1984). The effect of sampling error on convergence, improper solutions, and goodness-of-fit indices for maximum likelihood confirmatory factor analysis. Psychometrika, 49, 155-173.
2. Andreou, E., & Metallidou, P. (2004). The relationship of academic and social cognition to behaviour in bullying situations among Greek primary school children. Educational Psychology, 24(1), 27-41
3. Artelt, C. (2005). Cross-Cultural Approaches to Measuring Motivation. Educational Assessment, 10(3), 231-255
4. Bong, M. (2001). Between- and within-domain relations of academic motivation among middle and high school students: Self-efficacy, task-value and achievement goals. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(1), 23-34.
5. Bong, M., & Hocevar, D. (2002). Measuring self-efficacy: Multitrait-multimethod comparison of scaling procedures. Applied Measurement in Education, 15(2), 143-172.
6. Chen, C. S. (2002) Self-regulated learning strategies and achievement in an introduction to information systems course. Information Technology, Learning and Performance Journal, 20(1), 11-25
7. Cole, D.A. (1987); Utility of confirmatory factor analysis in test validation research. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 55, 1019-1031.
8. Duncan, T. G. & McKeachie, W. J. (2005). The Making of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire, Educational Psychologist, 40(2), 117-128
9. Eccles, J. (1983). Expectancies, values and academic behaviors. In J.T. Spence (Ed.), Achievement and achievement motives (pp. 75-146). San Francisco: Freeman.
10. Eshel, Y. & Kohavi, R. (2003). Perceived classroom control, self-regulated learning strategies, and academic achievement. Educational Psychology, 23(3), 249-260.
11. Garcia, T. & Pintrich, P.R (1996). Assessing Students' Motivation and Learning Strategies in the Classroom Context: the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire. Alternatives in assessment of achievements, learning processes and prior knowledge. Edited by Menucha Brenbaum, Filip JRC Dochy. Kluwer Academic Publishers. Boston/Dordrecht/London.
12. Marsh, H.W. & Hocevar, D. (1988). A new more powerful approach to multitrait-multimethod analysis: application of second-order confirmatory analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology 73, 107-117.
13. Marsh, H.W., Balla, JR. & McDonald, R.P., (1988), Goodness-of-fit indexes in confirmatory factory analysis: the effects of sample size, Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 391-410.
14. Neber, H., & Heller, K. A. (2002). Evaluation of a summer-school program for highly gifted secondary-school students: The German Pupils Academy. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 18(3), 214-228.
15. Ommundsen, Y. (2003). Implicit theories of ability and self-regulation strategies in physical education classes. Educational Psychology, 23(2), 141-157.
16. Pintrich, P. R. (1988). A process-oriented view of student motivation and cognition. In J. S. Stark & L. Mets (Eds.), Improving teaching and learning through research. New directions for institutional research, 57 (pp. 55-70). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
17. Pintrich, P. R. (1989). The dynamic interplay of student motivation and cognition in the college classroom. In C. Ames & M. Maehr(Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement: Vol. 6. Motivation enhancing environments (pp. 117-160). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
18. Pintrich, P.R. & De Groot, E.V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1) 33-40.
19. Pintrich, P.R., Smith, D.A.F., Garcia, T. & McKeachie, W.J. (1991). A Manual for the use of the motivated strategies for learning. Michigan: School of Education Building, The University of Michigan. ERIC database number: ED338122.
20. Pintrich, P.R., Smith, D.A.F., Garcia, T. & McKeachie, W.J. (1993). Reliability and predictive validity of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire (MSLQ). Educational and Psychological Measurement,53 (3), 801-814.
21. Rao, N. & Sachs, J. (1999). Confirmatory Factor Analysis of The Chinese Version Of The Motivated Strategies For Learning Questionnaire. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 59 (6), 1016-1029.
22. Rao N.,Moely, B. E., & Sachs, J. (2000). Motivational beliefs, study strategies, and mathematics attainment in high- and low-achieving Chinese secondary school students. Contemporary Educational Psychology,25(3), 287-316.
23. Sachs J., Law Y. K., & Chan C. K. K. (2002). An analysis of the relationship between the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire and the Learning Process Questionnaire. Psychologia: An International Journal of Psychology in the Orient, 45(3), 193-203.
24. Sachs, J., Law, Y. K., Chan, C. K. K., & Rao, N. (2001). A nonparametric item analysis of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire-Chinese version. Psychologia, 44, 197-208.
25. Zimmerman, B.J. & Martinez-Pons, M. (1990). Student differences in self-regulated learning: relating grade, sex and giftedness to self-efficacy and strategy-use. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1) 51-59.