SavedAdd your journal

Journals / International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education / 2018 / Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 2

Measurement Invariance of Science Self-Efficacy Scale in PISA

Nermin Kıbrıslıoğlu Uysal
Çiğdem Akın Arıkan
Pages
325–338
Publication Date
2018-05-19
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Structural and metric invariance was provided for both gender across years and total group across years.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The aim of this study is to find out whether the science self-efficacy scale in PISA 2006 and PISA 2015 applications ensure measurement invariance.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Sample of the study consists of 4791 students in PISA 2006 and 5071 students in PISA 2015 implementation.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Structural and metric invariance was provided for both gender across years and total group across years.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2006 Verileri
⚙️Variables:PISA · Self-efficacy · Gender

Abstract

The aim of this study is to find out whether the science self-efficacy scale in PISA 2006 and PISA 2015 applications ensure measurement invariance. Sample of the study consists of 4791 students in PISA 2006 and 5071 students in PISA 2015 implementation. Multi-group Confirmatory Factor Analysis (MGCFI) was performed to determine invariance of the science self-efficacy scale across year and gender. Invariance stages were examined by means of the comparison of fit indexes. The results of the study indicated that the science self-efficacy scale satisfied all stages of invariance by gender both in 2006 and 2015. Structural and metric invariance was provided for both gender across years and total group across years.

Özet

The aim of this study is to find out whether the science self-efficacy scale in PISA 2006 and PISA 2015 applications ensure measurement invariance. Sample of the study consists of 4791 students in PISA 2006 and 5071 students in PISA 2015 implementation. Multi-group Confirmatory Factor Analysis (MGCFI) was performed to determine invariance of the science self-efficacy scale across year and gender. Invariance stages were examined by means of the comparison of fit indexes. The results of the study indicated that the science self-efficacy scale satisfied all stages of invariance by gender both in 2006 and 2015. Structural and metric invariance was provided for both gender across years and total group across years.

🔖

Cite This Article

Uysal, N. K., Arıkan, Ç. A. (2018). Measurement Invariance of Science Self-Efficacy Scale in PISA. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 2, 325–338. https://ajindex.com/articles/717076

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (10)

  1. Akyıldız, M. (2009). PIRLS 2001 testinin yapı geçerliliğinin ülkelerarası karşılaştırılması. Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 6(1), 18- 47. Andrew, S. (1998). Self-efficacy as a predictor of academic performance in science. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 1998, 27, 596–603, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2648.1998.00550.x. Asil, M. &Gelbal, S. (2012). PISA öğrenci anketinin kültürler arası eşdeğerliği. Eğitim ve Bilim, 37(166), 236-249.
  2. Balbağ, M. Z., & Balbağ, N. L. (2016). Öğretmen adaylarının fen ve teknoloji okuryazarlığına ilişkin özyeterlik algıları ile bilgi okuryazarlıkları arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi. Pegem Atıf İndeksi, 429-446.
  3. Bandura, A., (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84 (2), 191-215.
  4. Bandura, A., (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37 (2), 122-147.
  5. Başusta, N. B., & Gelbal, S. (2015). Gruplararası Karşılaştırmalarda Ölçme Değişmezliğinin Test Edilmesi: PISA Öğrenci Anketi Örneği. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 30(4), 80-90.
  6. Borsboom, D. (2006). When does measurement invariance matter? Medical care, 44, 176-181.
  7. Britner, S.L. & Pajares, F. (2001). Self-efficacy beliefs, motivation, race, and gender in middle school science. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 7 (4), doi: 10.1615/JWomenMinorScienEng.v7.i4.10. Bulut, O., Palma, J., Rodrigez, M. C. & Stanke,L. (2015). Evaluating measurement invariance in the measurement of developmental assets in Latino English language groups across developmental stages. SAGE Open, 1–18, doi: 10.1177/2158244015586238. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2002). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi elkitabı. Ankara:
  8. Pegem Yayıncılık. Cheung, G., W., & Rensvold, R., B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 9(2), 233–255, doi: 10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_5 Çokluk, Ö., Şekercioğlu, G., & Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2012). Sosyal bilimler için çok değişkenli istatistik: SPSS ve LISREL uygulamaları. Pegem Akademi. Ercikan, K., & Koh, K. (2005). Examining the construct comparability of the English and French versions of TIMSS. International Journal of Testing, 5, 23-35.
  9. Gregorich, S. E. (2006). Do self-report instruments allow meaningful comparisons across diverse population groups?: Testing measurement invariance using the confirmatory factor analysis framework. Medical Care, 44, 78-94.
  10. Gülleroğlu, H. D. (2017