Examining the validity of self‐reports on scales measuring students' strategic processing

Marit S. Samuelstuen · Ivar Bråten

101 citations0/0 files storedBritish Journal of Educational Psychology

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Reading and Literacy Development Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods Educational Strategies and Epistemologies

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Self-report inventories trying to measure strategic processing at a global level have been much used in both basic and applied research. However, the validity of global strategy scores is open to question because such inventories assess strategy perceptions outside the context of specific task performance. AIMS: The primary aim was to examine the criterion-related and construct validity of the global strategy data obtained with the Cross-Curricular Competencies (CCC) scale. Additionally, we wanted to compare the validity of these data with the validity of data obtained with a task-specific self-report inventory focusing on the same types of strategies. SAMPLE: The sample included 269 10th-grade students from 12 different junior high schools. METHODS: Global strategy use as assessed with the CCC was compared with task-specific strategy use reported in three different reading situations. Moreover, relationships between scores on the CCC and scores on measures of text comprehension were examined and compared with relationships between scores on the task-specific strategy measure and the same comprehension measures. RESULTS: The comparison between the CCC strategy scores and the task-specific strategy scores suggested only modest criterion-related validity for the data obtained with the global strategy inventory. The CCC strategy scores were also not related to the text comprehension measures, indicating poor construct validity. In contrast, the task-specific strategy scores were positively related to the comprehension measures, indicating good construct validity. CONCLUSION: Attempts to measure strategic processing at a global level seem to have limited validity and utility.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 101 citations exist upstream.

References

1986Handbook of research on teaching 2000Attaining Self-Regulation 1984Reciprocal Teaching of Comprehension-Fostering and Comprehension-Monitoring Activities 2000The Role of Goal Orientation in Self-Regulated Learning 2000Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction 2004A Conceptual Framework for Assessing Motivation and Self-Regulated Learning in College Students 1991A Manual for the Use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ).1994Assessing Metacognitive Awareness

Cited by

2017Co-creating rubrics: The effects on self-regulated learning, self-efficacy and performance of establishing assessment criteria with students 2013Rubrics vs. self-assessment scripts effect on self-regulation, performance and self-efficacy in pre-service teachers 2009Approach–avoidance motivation and metacognitive self-regulation: The role of need for achievement and fear of failure 2013Measuring the complexity of upper primary school children’s self-regulated learning: A multi-component approach

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.