Lm. Carey et al., PROCEDURES FOR DESIGNING COURSE-EVALUATION INSTRUMENTS - MASKED PERSONALITY FORMAT VERSUS TRANSPARENT ACHIEVEMENT FORMAT, Educational and psychological measurement, 54(1), 1994, pp. 134-145
Citations number
16
Categorie Soggetti
Psychology, Educational","Psychologym Experimental","Mathematical, Methods, Social Sciences
One important consideration in designing instruments to measure studen
ts' attitudes about a course or an instructor is the influence of the
format of the instrument on students' responses. This study contrasted
the effects of randomly distributing the items throughout the questio
nnaire (personality format) versus grouping the items together from th
e same dimension (achievement format) on students' end-of-term course
evaluations. On the last day of class, 376 undergraduate students were
randomly assigned to complete anonymously the Academic Motivation Pro
file (AMP) constructed using either a personality or achievement forma
t. A 2 (Format) x 10 (Class Section) MANOVA of the 12 scales of the co
urse evaluation instrument demonstrated a statistically significant Fo
rmat effect (Wilks's lambda = .85, p < .001), a statistically signific
ant Section effect (Wilks's lambda = .37, p < .001), and no significan
t Format x Section interaction (Wilks's lambda = .70, p > .05). Examin
ation of the factor structures using confirmatory factor analysis indi
cated that the measurement model underlying the AMP fit the data reaso
nably well for both the achievement and personality formats; however,
the achievement format provided a better fit. Based on the statistical
results and the fact that the achievement format may be more straight
forward, produce less suspicion from the student, and be more time eff
icient, it should be considered when designing course evaluation instr
uments.