The Construct and Predictive Validity of a Self-Assessment Scale

被引:0
|
作者
Fan, Jason Jinsong [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Fudan Univ, Shanghai, Peoples R China
[2] Univ Melbourne, Melbourne, Vic, Australia
来源
关键词
self-assessment; validity argument; Rasch analysis; structural equation modeling;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
H0 [语言学];
学科分类号
030303 ; 0501 ; 050102 ;
摘要
Guided by the theory of interpretive validity argument, this study investigated the plausibility and accuracy of five sets of warrants which were deemed crucial to the validity of a self-assessment (SA) scale designed and used in a local EFL context. Methodologically, this study utilized both the Rasch measurement theory and structural equation modeling (SEM) to examine the five warrants and their respective rebuttals. Results from Rasch analysis indicated that the scale could reliably distinguish students at different proficiency levels. Among the 26 can-do statements in the SA scale, only one statement failed to fit the expectations of the Rasch model. Furthermore, each category was found to function as intended, though the first category was somewhat underused. Confirmatory factor analysis of the SA data supported the tenability of the Higher-Order Factor model which is consistent with the current view of L2 ability. Structural regression analysis revealed that the association between students' self-assessments and their scores on a standardized proficiency test was moderately strong. The multiple strands of evidence generated by various quantitative analyses of the SA data generally supported the validity of the SA scale. Future research, however, is warranted to examine other inferences in the validity argument structure, particularly in relation to the utility of the SA scale in English teaching and learning.
引用
收藏
页码:69 / 100
页数:32
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Office job sitting demand scale: Evidence of construct and predictive validity
    Kovacs, Peter
    Virga, Delia
    SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY, 2023, 64 (01) : 80 - 88
  • [42] THE KARNOFSKY PERFORMANCE STATUS SCALE - RELIABILITY, CONSTRUCT, AND PREDICTIVE-VALIDITY
    MOR, V
    LALIBERTE, L
    GERONTOLOGIST, 1982, 22 : 216 - 216
  • [43] Self-assessment as 'assessment as learning' in translator and interpreter education: validity and washback
    Li, Xiangdong
    INTERPRETER AND TRANSLATOR TRAINER, 2018, 12 (01): : 48 - 67
  • [44] Validity of the Functional Gait Assessment in Patients With Parkinson Disease: Construct, Concurrent, and Predictive Validity
    Yang, Yaqin
    Wang, Yongjun
    Zhou, Yanan
    Chen, Chen
    Xing, Deli
    Wang, Chunxue
    PHYSICAL THERAPY, 2014, 94 (03): : 392 - 400
  • [45] Construct validity of the Persian version of the Child Occupational Self-Assessment in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in Iran
    Sattari, Mahsa
    Yazdani, Farzaneh
    Rassafiani, Mehdi
    Hosseini, Seyed Ali
    HONG KONG JOURNAL OF OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY, 2019, 32 (02) : 127 - 135
  • [46] Factor Structure and Construct Validity of the Worker Role Self-Assessment (WRS) When Used for People With Psychiatric Disabilities in Sweden
    Eklund, Mona
    Backstrom, Martin
    EVALUATION & THE HEALTH PROFESSIONS, 2016, 39 (03) : 299 - 316
  • [47] DEVELOPMENT OF A GERIATRIC BEHAVIORAL SELF-ASSESSMENT SCALE
    YESAVAGE, JA
    ADEY, M
    WERNER, PD
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN GERIATRICS SOCIETY, 1981, 29 (06) : 285 - 288
  • [48] An examination of gender differences in the construct validity of the silencing the self scale
    Lutz-Zois, Catherine J.
    Dixon, Lee J.
    Smidt, Alec M.
    Goodnight, Jackson A.
    Gordon, Cameron L.
    Ridings, Leigh E.
    PERSONALITY AND INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES, 2013, 55 (01) : 35 - 40
  • [49] Self-Undermining Behavior at Work: Evidence of Construct an Predictive Validity
    Bakker, Arnold B.
    Wang, Yiqing
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF STRESS MANAGEMENT, 2020, 27 (03) : 241 - 251
  • [50] Factor structure and construct validity of the scale for the assessment of negative symptoms
    Sayers, SL
    Curran, PJ
    Mueser, KT
    PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT, 1996, 8 (03) : 269 - 280