Dale Hilty
Mt. Carmel College of Nursing, USA
Title: Preliminary investigation of the affective domain questionnaire: reliability & validity findings
Biography
Biography: Dale Hilty
Abstract
Study 1: The participants were approximately 500 Bachelor of Science in Nursing (BSN) students in an undergraduate program.
Hypothesis 1: Using SPSS 25, the exploratory principal axis factor analysis (EPAFA) was used to determine if the ADQ multi-dimensional construct (i.e., two or more common factors). Hypothesis 2: Determine if the reliability estimate(s) would be greater than 80 for engagement common factors.
Study 2
The participants (N=111) were senior level BSN students in an undergraduate program.
Hypothesis 1: There would be a difference between the Hilty (2017) competitive greatness (high and moderate-low scoring groups) when compared to the ADQ common factors (SPSS 25, Independent t-test).
Results
Study 1
Hypothesis 1: The EPAFA found three common factors accounting for 58% of the variance. The first factor combined the questions measuring the Krathwohl et al., (1964) theoretical categories of 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, and 3.1. The second factor groups the questions measuring the theoretical categories 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 4.1, and 4.2. The third common factor assembled the questions measuring the 5.1 and 5.2 categories. Hypothesis 2: The coefficient alpha reliability estimates were greater than .80 (First Factor 895; Second Factor 931; Third Factor 896.
Study 2
Hypothesis 1: The competitive greatness (CG) scale was used to divide the nursing student sample into two groups. The high scoring CG group (N=62) and the moderate-low scoring group (N=49) had comparable numbers of students. Independent t-test (N=111) analyses found significant differences between the two CG groups and the second factor (p=.032) and the third factor (p=.001). There was no significant difference between the two CG groups and the first factor (p=.141).
Krathwohl, Bloom, and Masia's (1964) Taxonomy
