The purpose of this article is to describe preliminary psychometric characteristics of a student self-report measure of self-determination, the Self-Determination Inventory: Student Report version (SDI-SR), designed for youth with and without disabilities. We administered the draft assessment to 311 youth and examined item functioning using structural equation modeling and item response theory. The 50 items that demonstrated strong psychometric properties were examined for construct validity using a series of confirmatory factor analyses. Overall, the pilot measure aligned well with the theoretical framework that guided its development, demonstrating acceptable model fit in adolescents with and without disabilities. Implications for further development and practice are discussed.
AhearnE. (1997). The use of visual analog scales in mood disorders: A critical review. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 5, 569–579.
2.
BrownT. A. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford.
3.
CarterE. W.LaneK. L.PiersonM. R.GlaeserB. (2006). Self-determination skills and opportunities of transition-age youth with emotional disturbance and learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 72, 333–346.
4.
CheungG. W.RensvoldR. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 233–255.
5.
Council of Chief State School Officers & National Governors Association. (2011). Common core state standards. Washington, DC: Authors.
6.
CronbachL. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16, 297–334.
7.
DowningS. M.HaladynaT. H. (2006). Handbook of text development. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
8.
HartleyS. L.MacLeanW. E. (2006). A review of the reliability and validity of Likert-type scales for people with intellectual disability. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 50, 813–827.
9.
HuL. T.BentlerP. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55.
10.
KonradM.FowlerC. H.WalkerA. R.TestD. W.WoodW. M. (2007). Effects of self-determination interventions on the academic skills of students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 30, 89–113. doi:10.2307/30035545
11.
LeeS. H.WehmeyerM. L.PalmerS. B.SoukupJ. H.LittleT. D. (2008). Self-determination and access to the general education curriculum. The Journal of Special Education, 42, 91–107.
12.
LittleT. D. (2013). Longitudinal structural equation modeling. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
13.
LittleT. D.HawleyP. H.HenrichC. C.MarslandK. (2002). Three views of the agentic self: A developmental synthesis. In DeciE. L.RyanR. M. (Eds.), Handbook of self-determination research (pp. 389–404). Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.
14.
LittleT. D.LopezD. F. (1997). Regularities in the development of children’s causality beliefs about school performance across six sociocultural contexts. Developmental Psychology, 33, 165–175.
15.
LittleT. D.RhemtullaM.GibsonK.SchoemannA. M. (2013). Why the items versus parcels controversy needn’t be one. Psychological Methods, 18, 285–300. doi:10.1037/a0033266
16.
LombardiA. R.KowittJ.StaplesF. (2014). Correlates of critical thinking and college and career readiness for secondary students with and without disabilities. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/2165143414534888
17.
LopezS. J.SnyderC. R. (Eds.). (2011). The Oxford handbook of positive psychology (2nd ed.). London, England: Oxford University Press.
18.
McDonaldR. P. (2013). Test theory: A unified treatment. New York, NY: Psychology Press.
19.
MuthénL. K.MuthénB. O. (1998–2012). Mplus user’s guide (6th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Author.
20.
PonterottoJ.RuckdeschelD. (2007). An overview of coefficient alpha and a reliability matrix for estimating adequacy of internal consistency coefficients with psychological research measures. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 105, 997–1014.
21.
RauschM.ZehetleitnerM. (2014). A comparison between a visual analogue scale and a four point scale as measures of conscious experience of motion. Consciousness and Cognition, 28, 126–140.
22.
SavaleiV.KolenikovS. (2008). Constrained versus unconstrained estimation in structural equation modeling. Psychological Methods, 13, 150–170.
23.
ShogrenK. A. (2013). Self-determination and transition planning. Baltimore, MD: Brookes.
24.
ShogrenK. A.LopezS. J.WehmeyerM. L.LittleT. D.PressgroveC. L. (2006). The role of positive psychology constructs in predicting life satisfaction in adolescents with and without cognitive disabilities: An exploratory study. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 1, 37–52.
25.
ShogrenK. A.PalmerS. B.WehmeyerM. L.Williams-DiehmK.LittleT. D. (2012). Effect of intervention with the self-determined learning model of instruction on access and goal attainment. Remedial and Special Education, 33, 320–330. doi:10.1177/0741932511410072
26.
ShogrenK. A.ShawL. A. (in press). The role of self-determination in predicting early adulthood outcomes for youth with disabilities. Remedial and Special Education.
27.
ShogrenK. A.WehmeyerM. L.LaneK. L. (in press). Embedding interventions to promote self-determination within multi-tiered systems of supports. Exceptionality.
28.
ShogrenK. A.WehmeyerM. L.PalmerS. B.Forber-PrattA.LittleT. J.LopezS. J. (in press). Causal agency theory: Reconceptualizing a functional model of self-determination. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities.
29.
ShogrenK. A.WehmeyerM. L.PalmerS. B.RifenbarkG. G.LittleT. D. (2015). Relationships between self-determination and postschool outcomes for youth with disabilities. The Journal of Special Education, 53, 30–41. doi:10.1177/0022466913489733
30.
ShogrenK. A.WehmeyerM. L.PalmerS. B.SoukupJ. H.LittleT. D.GarnerN.LawrenceM. (2007). Examining individual and ecological predictors of the self-determination of students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 73, 488–509.
31.
ShogrenK. A.WehmeyerM. L.PalmerS. B.SoukupJ. H.LittleT. D.GarnerN.LawrenceM. (2008). Measuring self-determination: Examining the relationship between The Arc’s Self-Determination Scale and the AIR Self-Determination Scale. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 33, 94–107.
32.
ShogrenK. A.WehmeyerM. L.PressgroveC. L.LopezS. J. (2006). The application of positive psychology and self-determination to research in intellectual disability: A content analysis of 30 years of literature. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 31, 338–345.
33.
TestD. W.FowlerC. H.RichterS. M.WhiteJ.MazzottiV.WalkerA. R.. . . KorteringL. (2009). Evidence-based practices in secondary transition. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 32, 115–128. doi:10.1177/0885728809336859
34.
van BuurenS.Groothuis-OudshoornK. (2011). Mice: Multivariate imputation by chained equations in R. Journal of Statistical Software, 45, 1–67.
35.
WehmeyerM. L. (1992). Self-determination and the education of students with mental retardation. Education and Training in Mental Retardation, 27, 302–314.
36.
WehmeyerM. L.FieldS.DorenB.JonesB.MasonC. (2004). Self-determination and student involvement in standards-based reform. Exceptional Children, 70, 413–425.
37.
WehmeyerM. L.KelchnerK. (1995). The Arc’s Self-Determination Scale. Arlington, TX: The Arc National Headquarters.
38.
WehmeyerM. L.PalmerS. B.AgranM.MithaugD. E.MartinJ. E. (2000). Promoting causal agency: The self-determined learning model of instruction. Exceptional Children, 66, 439–453.
39.
WehmeyerM. L.PalmerS. B.ShogrenK. A.Williams-DiehmK.SoukupJ. H. (2013). Establishing a causal relationship between interventions to promote self-determination and enhanced student self-determination. The Journal of Special Education, 46, 195–210. doi:10.1177/0022466910392377
40.
WehmeyerM. L.ShogrenK. A.PalmerS. B.Williams-DiehmK.LittleT. D.BoultonA. (2012). Impact of the Self-Determined Learning Model of Instruction on student self-determination: A randomized-trial placebo control group study. Exceptional Children, 78, 135–153.
41.
WidamanK. F.LittleT. D.PreacherK. J.SawalaniG. (2011). On creating and using short forms of scales in secondary research. In TrzesniewskiK.RobertsB. (Eds.), Archival research methods (pp. 39–61). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
