An official website of the United States government
Existing literature has established that interpersonal and academic validating experiences help provide college students with the necessary personal and scholastic skillsets to thrive in higher education (e.g., Coronella, 2018; Ekal et al., 2011). This intrinsic mixed methods case study explores the extent to which undergraduate students perceived academic and interpersonal validation within a science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) pipeline program (CMSP) can empower students and influence their attitudes towards their learning environment.
more »
« less
Development of a College Student Validation Survey: A Design-Based Research Approach
Rendón’s (1994) seminal research on validation theory (VT) provided a model for understanding how validating experiences can positively influence “culturally diverse” (p. 33) students in higher education. Validation is “an enabling, confirming and supportive process initiated by in- and out-of-class agents that fosters academic and interpersonal development” (Rendón, 1994, p. 44) and is critical for the transition, persistence, and success of college students (Rendón, 1994, 2002). Through this theoretical model, scholars have extensively explored how institutions can provide validating experiences by developing supportive learning environments for general undergraduate populations and specific groups such as Black, Latinx, low-income, first-generation, and two-year college students (e.g., Allen, 2016; Bauer, 2014). Many prior studies have relied on qualitative methods. While Rendón and Muñoz (2011) have called for further study of validation’s impact on student outcomes through quantitative methods, few quantitative instruments of VT exist. The primary tool used for assessing VT consists of two scales from the larger Diverse Learning Environments (DLE; Hurtado et al., 2011) survey that have demonstrated their effectiveness for measuring academic validation in class and general interpersonal validation among college students at large (Hurtado et al., 2015). DLE scales were not, however, designed to match Rendón’s full four-component conception of VT (i.e., academic in-class, academic out-of-class, interpersonal in-class, interpersonal out-of-class). Thus, a new measure of VT is necessary to capture quantitative information aligned with Rendón’s model. The purpose of this study was to expand the field of quantitative VT research by presenting validity evidence from a new survey entitled the Validation Theory Survey (VTS) that was designed to align with Rendón’s VT model and to be used with undergraduate students. One overarching research question guided this study: To what extent did validity evidence (i.e., content, response process, consequential, and internal structure) support the use of the VTS to evaluate undergraduates’ perceptions of their academic and interpersonal validating experiences inside and outside higher education classrooms?
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1922202
- PAR ID:
- 10552995
- Publisher / Repository:
- Johns Hopkins University Press
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Mainsl haul
- ISSN:
- 1540-3386
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
This study presents qualitative findings from a larger instrument validation study. Undergraduates and subject matter experts (SMEs) were pivotal in early-stage development of a survey focusing on the four domains of Validation Theory (academic-in-class, academic-out-of-class, interpersonal-in-class, interpersonal-out-of-class). An iterative approach allowed for a more rigorously constructed survey refined through multiple phases. The research team met regularly to determine how feedback from undergraduates and SMEs could improve items and if certain populations were potentially being excluded. To date, the research team has expanded on the original 47 items up to 51 to address feedback provided by SMEs and undergraduate participants. Numerous item wording revisions have been made. Support for content, response process, and consequential validity evidence is strong.more » « less
-
Although there are numerous evidence-based benefits to undergraduate research for new-majority students (students who are from traditionally underrepresented ethnicities, first-generation college students, students from lower-income families, or transfer students) (Hurtado, S. et al., 2011; Kinzie et al., 2008a; Lopatto, 2007), they are less likely to participate or stay in mentored research experiences (Finley & McNair, 2013; Haeger et al., 2015). In order to determine not only who has access to undergraduate research, but to also identify what barriers to full-inclusion exist for new-majority students, we conducted a mixed methods study at a public, Hispanic Serving Institution. We analyzed institutional data to explore who participates in research and who does not. We also specifically sampled a group of students who expressed an interest in research experiences but who never actually participated for our student survey (N=96). Additionally, we conducted five focus groups with students, staff, and faculty (N~30). We found positive results in the analysis of patterns of participation and found no significant or substantial differences between students who did or did not participate in undergraduate research in terms of race/ethnicity, gender, or first-generation status. The undergraduate researcher population did have significantly more STEM majors and Pell grant recipients. The qualitative analysis identified barriers to participation in research in the following areas: access to research opportunities, programmatic structures, research culture and norms, and campus climate. We present these findings along with descriptions of initiatives that have been successful in diversifying research participation and strategies to create more inclusive research environments.more » « less
-
This research base paper examines students who are the first in their families to attend college. Our research seeks to understand the role students’ funds of knowledge makes in first-generation college students’ undergraduate experience. Funds of knowledge are the set of formal/informal knowledge and skills that students learn through family, friends, and communities outside of academic institutions. This paper reports funds of knowledge themes relevant to first-generation college students in engineering and the process of gathering validity evidence to support the funds of knowledge themes. Using ethnographic and interview data, six themes emerged: connecting experiences, community networks, tinkering knowledge, perspective taking, reading people, and mediational skills. Pilot data collected at two institutions were used to run exploratory factor analysis to verify the underlying theoretical structures among the themes. Results of the exploratory factor analysis found that almost all items reliably loaded onto their respective constructs. The funds of knowledge identified in this study are not an exhaustive account, nevertheless uncovering these hidden assets can support first-generation college students to see their experiences as equally valuable knowledge in engineering. We are currently in an ongoing process of collecting a second dataset to perform a confirmatory factor analysis, i.e., the next phase of the validation process for survey instrument development.more » « less
-
This research paper measures college students' sense of belonging. Students' sense of belonging (SB) has been identified as a critical contributor to engineering students’ persistence, academic success, and professional identity in engineering. Therefore, how to accurately measure SB has become an emerging topic but is still challenging. Although engineering education researchers are interested in measuring students’ SB, they have presented concerns over selecting an appropriate instrument that results in trustworthy measurement outcomes. One of the reasons that cause challenges is that SB is a complicated construct that has various conceptual definitions. For example, Goodenow (1993) defined SB as “being accepted, valued, included, and encouraged by others...feeling oneself to be an important part of the life and activity of the class” (p. 25), which can be measured as a general SB. On the other hand, Freeman et al. (2007) viewed SB as a multi-dimensional construct that includes class belonging, university belonging, professors’ pedagogical caring, and social acceptance. Thus far, several instruments have been developed to measure SB from a single-dimensional perspective (e.g., Goodenow’s Psychological Sense of School Membership) and a multi-dimensional perspective (e.g., Slaten et al.’s the University Belonging Questionnaire). To our best knowledge, little research effort has been made to synthesize the information of instruments developed for measuring college students’ SB. This paper attempts to close the gap in the literature by conducting a systematic review following PRISMA (the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines to summarize the information and characteristics of existing SB instruments, including the theoretical framework underlying the instrument, psychometric properties in previous studies, and validation works that have been carried out. Specifically, this paper focuses on the following aims: (a) to summarize how SB has been constructed and defined by different theories in higher education, (b) to report existing measurement instruments of SB used in higher education and their psychometric properties (reliability and validity), and (c) to compare various analytical plans for establishing the construct validity (including multicultural validity) in prior instrument development studies. The emergent findings provide insights into how to effectively measure SB and would facilitate school leaders' and educators’ work in promoting engineering students’ success and broadening participation in engineering. Keywords: Sense of belonging, engineering education, instrument, systematic reviewmore » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- The DOI is not currently available.
