For decades, research has indicated that preadolescents’ self-concept is comprised of subject-specific academic factors, a general academic factor, and several nonacademic factors. More recently, there have been some indications that academic self-concept might further be differentiated into competence and affect factors, at least for some preadolescent ethnic groups. This study examines the extent to which a 6-factor model of academic self-concept, in which competence and affect are distinct, is tenable for White, Hispanic, and Native American preadolescents. A total of 313 White, 331 Hispanic, and 224 Native American preadolescents from the southwestern United States were administered a modified version of the SDQI. A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) indicated that the 6-factor model of academic self-concept was tenable. A multiple-groups CFA suggested that the 6-factor model was largely group invariant between White and Hispanic and White and Native American preadolescents. However, important differences in the structures were identified.
AbediJ. (2009). Validity of assessments for English language learning students in a national/international context. Estudios sobre Educación, 16, 167-183.
2.
BentlerP. M. (1995-2008). EQS version 6.1 for windows (Build 94) [computer program]. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software.
3.
BentlerP. M. (2008). EQS program manual. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software.
4.
BongM.ClarkR. E. (1999). Comparison between self-concept and self-efficacy in academic motivation research. Educational Psychologist, 34, 139-153.
5.
BrownT. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York, NY: Guilford.
6.
ByrneB. M. (1996). Measuring self-concept across the life span: Issues and instrumentation. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
7.
ByrneB. (2006). Structural equation modeling with EQS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
8.
ChapmanJ. W.TunmerW. E. (1995). Development of young children’s reading self-concepts: An examination of emerging subcomponents and their relationship with reading achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 154-167.
9.
CheungG. W.RensvoldR. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A multidisciplinary Journal, 9, 233-255.
10.
del PradoA. M.ChurchA. T.KatigbackM. S.MiramontesL. G.WhittyM. T.CurtisG. J.ReyesJ. A. S. (2007). Culture, method, and the content of self-concepts: Testing trait, individual—self-primacy, and cultural psychology perspectives. Journal of Research in Personality, 41, 1119-1160.
11.
EcclesJ. S.WigfieldA. (2002). Motivation beliefs, values, and goals. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 109-132.
12.
El-HassanK. (2004). Structure and correlates of self-concept in Lebanon. International Journal of Testing, 4(1), 1-17.
13.
GrahamJ. M.GuthruieA. C.ThompsonB. (2003). Consequences of not interpreting structure coefficients in published CFA research: A reminder. Structural Equation Modeling: A multidisciplinary Journal, 10, 142-153.
14.
GuayF.MarshH. W.BoivinM. (2003). Academic self-concept and academic achievement: Developmental perspective on their causal ordering. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 124-136.
15.
GuérinF.MarshH. W.FamoseJ. (2003). Construct validation of the self-description questionnaire II with a French sample. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 19, 142-150.
16.
HerzogW.BoomsmaA. (2009). Small-sample robust estimators of noncentrality-based and incremental model fit. Structural Equation Modeling, 16, 1-27.
17.
KlineR. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
18.
LeachL. F.HensonR. K.OdomL. R.CagleL. S. (2006). A reliability generalization study of the self-description questionnaire. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66, 285-304.
19.
MarshH. W. (1988). Self-Description Questionnaire: A theoretical and empirical basis for the measurement of multiple dimensions of preadolescent self-concept. A test manual and a research monograph. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.
20.
MarshH. W. (1989). Sex effects in multiple dimensions of self-concept: Preadolescent to early adulthood. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 417-430.
21.
MarshH. W.AyotteV. (2003). Do multiple dimensions of self-concept become more differentiated with age? The differential distinctiveness hypothesis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95687-706.
22.
MarshH. W.CravenR. G. (2006). Reciprocal effects of self-concept and performance from a multidimensional perspective. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1, 133-163.
23.
MarshH. W.CravenR. G.DebusR. (1999). Separation of competency and affect components of multiple dimensions of academic self-concept: A developmental perspective. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 45, 567-601.
24.
MarshH. W.HauK. (2004). Explaining paradoxical relations between academic self-concepts and achievements: Cross-cultural generalizability of the internal/external frame of reference predictions across 26 countries. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 56-67.
25.
MucherahW.FinchH. (2010). The construct validity of the Self-Description Questionnaire on high school students in Kenya. International Journal of Testing, 10, 166-184.
26.
PietschJ.WalkerR.ChapmanE. (2003). The relationship among self-concept, self-efficacy, and performance in mathematics during secondary school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 589-603.
27.
SchumackerR.LomaxR. (2004). A beginner’s guide to structural equation modeling: Second edition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
28.
RyanR. M.DeciE. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 54-67.
29.
SatorraA.BentlerP. M. (1994). Corrections to test statistics and standard errors in covariance structure analysis. In von EyeA.CloggC. C. (Eds.), Latent variable analysis: Applications for developmental research (pp. 399-419). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
30.
SeatonM.MarshH. W.CravenR. G. (2009). Earning its place as a pan human theory: Universality of the big-fish-little-pond effect across 41 culturally and economically diverse countries. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 403-419.
31.
ShavelsonR. J.HubnerJ. J.StantonG. C. (1976). Self-concept: Validation of construct interpretations. Review of Educational Research, 46, 407-441.
UllmanJ. B.BentlerP. M. (2003). Structural equation modeling. In WeinerI. B.SchinkaJ. A.VelicerW.F. (Eds.). Handbook of psychology, 2: Research methods in psychology (pp. 607-634). Somerset, NJ: Wiley.
34.
WatkinsD.MpofuE. (1994). Some Zimbabwean evidence of the internal structure of the self-description questionnaire-1. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 54, 967-972.
35.
WhitesellN. R.MitchellC. M.KaufmanC. E.SpicerP.the Voices of Indian Teens Project Team. (2006). Developmental trajectories of personal and collective self-concept among American Indian adolescents. Child Development, 77, 1487-1503.
36.
YeungA. S.LeeF. L. (1999). Self-concept of high school students in China: Confirmatory factor analysis of longitudinal data. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 59, 431-450.
37.
YinP.FanX. (2003). Assessing the factor structure invariance of self-concept measurement across ethnic and gender groups: Findings from a national sample. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 63, 296-318.
