This study examined a modified version of the Student Engagement Scale, as adopted from the Australasian Survey of Student Engagement. It did so through examining model fit, predictive validity of the engagement factor, and testing of score reliability and measurement invariance across colleges and class years. Participants were volunteer undergraduate students (n = 536) from two colleges of a large university in Ethiopia. Confirmatory factor analysis using structural equation modelling was used. The results reasonably supported a nine-factor model over other models, and testing of measurement invariance confirmed a good model fit for the nine-factor model across college and class year. Overall, the findings demonstrated supporting evidence for the validity of the nine-factor structure.
BentlerP. M.BonettD. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88(3), 588–606. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.88.3.588.
2.
BollenK. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables, New York, NY: Wiley.
3.
BollenK. A.LongJ. S. (1993). Testing structural equation models, Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
4.
BrowneM.CudeckR. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological Methods and Research, 21(2), 230. doi:10.1177/0049124192021002005.
5.
BrysonC.HandL. (2007). The role of engagement in inspiring teaching and learning. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 44(4), 349–362.
6.
ByrneB.ShavelsonR.MuthénB. (1989). Testing for the equivalence of factor covariance and mean structures: The issue of partial measurement invariance. Psychological Bulletin, 105(3), 456–466. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.105.3.456.
7.
CampbellC. M.CabreraA. F. (2011). How sound is NSSE?: Investigating the psychometric properties of NSSE at a public, research-extensive institution. The Review of Higher Education, 35(1), 77–103. doi:10.1353/rhe.2011.0035.
8.
CampbellD. T.FiskeD. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56(2), 81–105.
9.
CheungG. W.RensvoldR. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 233–255. doi:10.1207/s15328007sem0902_5.
10.
ChosangT.StevenM. C.PennyL. B. (2013). Validating the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) at a Research-Intensive University. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 1(1), 182–193.
11.
CoatesH. (2005). The value of student engagement for higher education quality assurance. Quality in Higher Education, 11(1), 25–36.
12.
CoatesH. (2006). Student engagement in campus-based and online education: university connections, New York, NY: Routledge.
13.
CoatesH. (2010). Development of the Australasian survey of student engagement (AUSSE). Higher Education, 60(1), 1–17. doi:10.1007/s10734-009-9281-2.
14.
Coates, H. (2011). An overview of psychometric properties of the AUSSE Student Engagement Questionnaire (SEQ). AUSSE Research Briefing, 7 February 2011. Retrieved from http://research.acer.edu.au/ausse/5/.
15.
CoatesH.MahatM. (2014). Assessing student engagement and outcomes: Modelling insights from Australia and around the world. International Journal of Chinese Education, 2(2), 241–264. doi:10.1163/22125868-12340023.
16.
CochranW. G. (1952). The χ2 test of goodness of fit. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 23(3), 315–345.
17.
Comer, K., & Brogt, E. (2011). Student engagement in relation to their field of study. In Student Engagement in New Zealand’s Universities.
18.
CortinaJ. M. (1993). What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(1), 98–104.
19.
CruceT. M.KinzieJ.KuhG. D.GonyeaR. M.ShoupR. (2008). Unmasking the effects of student engagement on first-year college grades and persistence. The Journal of Higher Education, 79(5), 540–563.
20.
Erik, B., & Keith, C. (2013). Interpreting differences between the United States and New Zealand university students' engagement scores as measured by the NSSE and AUSSE. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(6), 713–724. doi:10.1080/02602938.2012.693906.
21.
Ewell, P. (2009). Assessment, accountability, and improvement: Revisiting the tension (National Institute of Learning Outcomes Assessment Occasional Paper No. 1).
22.
Fisher, R. A. (1935). The Logic of Inductive Inference. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 98(1), 39–82. doi:10.2307/2342435.
23.
GordonJ.LudlumJ.HoeyJ. J. (2008). Validating NSSE against student outcomes: Are they related?Research in Higher Education, 49(1), 19–39.
24.
GriffinP.CoatesH.McInnisC.JamesR. (2003). The development of an extended course experience questionnaire. Quality in Higher Education, 9(3), 259–266. doi:10.1080/135383203200015111.
25.
Hagel, P., Carr, R., & Devlin, M. (2012). Conceptualising and measuring student engagement through the australasian survey of student engagement (AUSSE): A critique. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 37(4), 475–486. doi:10.1080/02602938.2010.545870.
HernandezE.MobleyM.CoryellG.YuE.MartinezG. (2013). Examining the cultural validity of a college student engagement survey for Latinos. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 12(2), 153–173. doi:10.1177/1538192713475453.
28.
HuL.-T.BentlerP. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55. doi:10.1080/10705519909540118.
KlineR. (1998). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling, New York, NY: Guilford Press.
31.
Ko, M. S. (2011). College student satisfaction: Examining influences and differences in a public university system. Los Angeles: University of California.
32.
Krause, K. (2005). Understanding and promoting student engagement in university learning communities. Paper presented as keynote address: Engaged, Inert or Otherwise Occupied, 21–22.
33.
KrauseK.CoatesH. (2008). Students’ engagement in first-year university. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(5), 493–505. doi:10.1080/02602930701698892.
34.
Kuh, G. D. (2009). The national survey of student engagement: Conceptual and empirical foundations. New Directions for Institutional Research, 2009(141), 5–20. doi:10.1002/ir.283.
35.
LaNasaS. M.CabreraA. F.TrangsrudH. (2009). The construct validity of student engagement: A confirmatory factor analysis approach. Research in Higher Education, 50(4), 315–332. doi:10.1007/s11162-009-9123-1.
36.
LutzM.CulverS. (2010). The national survey of student engagement: A university-level analysis. Tertiary Education and Management, 16(1), 35–44. doi:10.1080/13583881003629814.
37.
Maroco, J., Maroco, A. L., Campos, J. A. D. B., & Fredricks, J. A. (2016). University student’s engagement: Development of the University Student Engagement Inventory (USEI). Psicologia: Reflexão e Crítica. Retrieved from https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41155-016-0042-8.
38.
MarshH. W. (1994). Confirmatory factor analysis models of factorial invariance: A multifaceted approach. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 1(1), 5–34. doi:10.1080/10705519409539960.
39.
MarshH. W.HocevarD. (1985). Application of confirmatory factor analysis to the study of self-concept: First-and higher order factor models and their invariance across groups. Psychological Bulletin, 97(3), 562–582.
40.
MartiC. N. (2009). Dimensions of student engagement in American community colleges: Using the community college student report in research and practice. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 33(1), 1–24. doi:10.1080/10668920701366867.
41.
MatthewR. W.AshleighM. H.ChristopherT. R. (2012). Student engagement in South African higher education. Journal of College Student Development, 53(1), 106–123.
42.
MilfontT. L.FischerR. (2015). Testing measurement invariance across groups: Applications in cross-cultural research. International Journal of Psychological Research, 3(1), 111–130.
43.
MuellerR. O. (1996). Basic principles of structural equation modelling, New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
44.
NunallyJ.BernsteinI. (1994). Psychometric theory, 3rd ed. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.
45.
PascarellaE.SeifertT. A.BlaichC. (2010). How effective are the NSSE benchmarks in predicting important educational outcomes?Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 42(1), 16–22. doi:10.1080/00091380903449060.
46.
PascarellaE.TerenziniP. (1991). How college affects students, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
47.
Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (2005). How college affects students Volume 2, a third decade of research/Ernest T. Pascarella, Patrick T. Terenzini (2nd ed.). San Francisco: San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
48.
PikeG.KuhG.GonyeaR. (2003). The relationship between institutional mission and students’ involvement and educational outcomes. Research in Higher Education, 44, 243–263.
ReinartzW.HaenleinM.HenselerJ. (2009). An empirical comparison of the efficacy of covariance-based and variance-based SEM. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 26(4), 332–344. doi:10.1016/j.ijresmar.2009.08.001.
51.
RossH.CenY.ZhouZ. (2011). Assessing student engagement in China: Responding to local and global discourse on raising educational quality. Current Issues in Comparative Education, 14(1), 24–37.
52.
Schmitt, N., & Kuljanin, G. (2008). Measurement invariance: Review of practice and implications. Human Resource Management Review, 18(4), 210–222. doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2008.03.003.
53.
SchreiberJ. B.NoraA.StageF. K.BarlowE. A.KingJ. (2006). Reporting structural equation modeling and confirmatory factor analysis results: A review. The Journal of Educational Research, 99(6), 323–337. doi:10.3200/joer.99.6.323-338.
54.
StevensJ. (2002). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
55.
Strydom, J. F., Basson, N., & Mentz, M. (2012). Enhancing the quality of teaching and learning: Using student engagement data to establish a culture of evidence. South Africa: Council on Higher Education Pretoria.
56.
StrydomJ.MentzM.KuhG. (2010). Enhancing success in higher education by measuring student engagement in South Africa. Acta Academica, 42(1), 259–278.
57.
Tadesse, T., Manathunga, C., & Gillies, R. (2017). The development and validation of the student engagement scale in an ethiopian university context. Higher Education Research & Development, 1–18. doi:10.1080/07294360.2017.1342605.
58.
TangC.WuC. (2010). Obtaining a picture of undergraduate education quality: A voice from inside the university. Higher Education, 60(3), 269–286. doi:10.1007/s10734-009-9299-5.
59.
VandenbergR. J.LanceC. E. (2000). A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 3, 4–70.
60.
Van de SchootR.LugtigP.HoxJ. (2012). A checklist for testing measurement invariance. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 9(4), 486–492. doi:10.1080/17405629.2012.686740.
61.
WefaldA. J.DowneyR. G. (2009). Construct dimensionality of engagement and its relation with satisfaction. The Journal of Psychology, 143(1), 91–112. doi:10.3200/jrlp.143.1.91-112.
62.
Wheaton, B., Muthén, B., Alwin, D., & Summers, G. (1977). Assessing reliability and stability in panel models. Sociological Methodology, 8, 84–136.
63.
ZepkeN.LeachL. (2010). Improving student engagement: Ten proposals for action. Active Learning in Higher Education, 11(3), 167–177. doi:10.1177/1469787410379680.
64.
Zerihun, Z., Beishuizen, J., & Van Os, W. (2012). Student learning experience as indicator of teaching quality. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 24(2), 99–111. doi:10.1007/s11092-011-9140-4.
