运用概化理论评估学生学业辅导评分的可靠性

IF 2.2 4区 教育学 Q1 Social Sciences
A. Sun, M. Valiga, Xiaohong Gao
{"title":"运用概化理论评估学生学业辅导评分的可靠性","authors":"A. Sun, M. Valiga, Xiaohong Gao","doi":"10.1080/00220973.1997.10806611","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The coefficient alpha procedure has been used frequently to assess the reliability of student ratings of academic advising, despite the fact that in many cases, coefficient alpha is not an appropriate procedure for providing reliability information on this type of measurement data. Data were collected from 15 postsec ondary institutions' use of the Survey of Academic Advising, and a more advanced framework, that is, the generalizability theory, was used to analyze the reliability of the data. The results of the study demonstrate that the reliability of student ratings of advising can be estimated more appropriately and accurately by using the proce dures of generalizability theory. Advantages and disadvantages of the generalizabil ity theory approach in assessing the reliability of student ratings of advising are dis cussed in comparison with those of the coefficient alpha procedure. USING STUDENT RATINGS as an outcome assessment to evaluate the qual ity of advising programs is a common practice in many postsecondary educa tional institutions. The results of such assessment often play a critical role in decisions about the future of the individual advisor?decisions about promotions and tenure and about the advising program, such as whether or not to continue a specific program or service (Severy, Lee, Carodine, Powers, & Mason, 1994). To justify the credibility of a decision, the decisionmaker needs some assurance from the data that the same or similar results could be obtained if the same advi sors and advising programs were rated again under similar circumstances. In measurement theory terms, these ratings should have a desirable level of relia bility.","PeriodicalId":47911,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Education","volume":"65 1","pages":"367-379"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"1997-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00220973.1997.10806611","citationCount":"17","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Using Generalizability Theory to Assess the Reliability of Student Ratings of Academic Advising\",\"authors\":\"A. Sun, M. Valiga, Xiaohong Gao\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00220973.1997.10806611\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The coefficient alpha procedure has been used frequently to assess the reliability of student ratings of academic advising, despite the fact that in many cases, coefficient alpha is not an appropriate procedure for providing reliability information on this type of measurement data. Data were collected from 15 postsec ondary institutions' use of the Survey of Academic Advising, and a more advanced framework, that is, the generalizability theory, was used to analyze the reliability of the data. The results of the study demonstrate that the reliability of student ratings of advising can be estimated more appropriately and accurately by using the proce dures of generalizability theory. Advantages and disadvantages of the generalizabil ity theory approach in assessing the reliability of student ratings of advising are dis cussed in comparison with those of the coefficient alpha procedure. USING STUDENT RATINGS as an outcome assessment to evaluate the qual ity of advising programs is a common practice in many postsecondary educa tional institutions. The results of such assessment often play a critical role in decisions about the future of the individual advisor?decisions about promotions and tenure and about the advising program, such as whether or not to continue a specific program or service (Severy, Lee, Carodine, Powers, & Mason, 1994). To justify the credibility of a decision, the decisionmaker needs some assurance from the data that the same or similar results could be obtained if the same advi sors and advising programs were rated again under similar circumstances. In measurement theory terms, these ratings should have a desirable level of relia bility.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47911,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Experimental Education\",\"volume\":\"65 1\",\"pages\":\"367-379\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"1997-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00220973.1997.10806611\",\"citationCount\":\"17\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Experimental Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.1997.10806611\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Experimental Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.1997.10806611","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 17

摘要

尽管在许多情况下,alpha系数并不是提供这类测量数据的可靠性信息的合适程序,但alpha系数程序已被频繁地用于评估学生对学术建议评分的可靠性。本研究收集了15所大专院校使用学术咨询调查的数据,并使用更高级的框架,即概括性理论,来分析数据的可靠性。研究结果表明,运用概括性理论可以更恰当、更准确地估计学生辅导评分的信度。通过与系数alpha法的比较,讨论了概化理论方法在评估学生建议评分可靠性方面的优缺点。在许多高等教育机构中,使用学生评分作为结果评估来评估咨询项目的质量是一种常见的做法。这种评估的结果通常在决定个别顾问的未来方面起着关键作用。关于晋升和任期的决定,以及关于咨询计划的决定,例如是否继续特定的计划或服务(Severy, Lee, Carodine, Powers, & Mason, 1994)。为了证明决策的可信度,决策者需要从数据中获得一定的保证,即如果在类似的情况下再次对相同的顾问和咨询项目进行评级,可以获得相同或类似的结果。在测量理论方面,这些评级应该有一个理想的可靠性水平。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Using Generalizability Theory to Assess the Reliability of Student Ratings of Academic Advising
The coefficient alpha procedure has been used frequently to assess the reliability of student ratings of academic advising, despite the fact that in many cases, coefficient alpha is not an appropriate procedure for providing reliability information on this type of measurement data. Data were collected from 15 postsec ondary institutions' use of the Survey of Academic Advising, and a more advanced framework, that is, the generalizability theory, was used to analyze the reliability of the data. The results of the study demonstrate that the reliability of student ratings of advising can be estimated more appropriately and accurately by using the proce dures of generalizability theory. Advantages and disadvantages of the generalizabil ity theory approach in assessing the reliability of student ratings of advising are dis cussed in comparison with those of the coefficient alpha procedure. USING STUDENT RATINGS as an outcome assessment to evaluate the qual ity of advising programs is a common practice in many postsecondary educa tional institutions. The results of such assessment often play a critical role in decisions about the future of the individual advisor?decisions about promotions and tenure and about the advising program, such as whether or not to continue a specific program or service (Severy, Lee, Carodine, Powers, & Mason, 1994). To justify the credibility of a decision, the decisionmaker needs some assurance from the data that the same or similar results could be obtained if the same advi sors and advising programs were rated again under similar circumstances. In measurement theory terms, these ratings should have a desirable level of relia bility.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
25
期刊介绍: The Journal of Experimental Education publishes theoretical, laboratory, and classroom research studies that use the range of quantitative and qualitative methodologies. Recent articles have explored the correlation between test preparation and performance, enhancing students" self-efficacy, the effects of peer collaboration among students, and arguments about statistical significance and effect size reporting. In recent issues, JXE has published examinations of statistical methodologies and editorial practices used in several educational research journals.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信