Construct validity of creative thinking skills instrument for biology student teachers in the subject of human physiology

Andi Ulfa Tenri Pada; Siti Salina Mustakim; Bambang Subali

doi:10.21831/pep.v22i2.22369

Construct validity of creative thinking skills instrument for biology student teachers in the subject of human physiology

Andi Ulfa Tenri Pada, Universitas Syiah Kuala Aceh, Indonesia
Siti Salina Mustakim, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Malaysia
Bambang Subali, Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta, Indonesia

10.21831/pep.v22i2.22369

Abstract

This article discusses the construct validity of the creative thinking skill instrument supporting a conation idea aspect for biology student-teachers in the subject of Human Physiology. Two hundred and eighteen students participated in this study. Construct validity was obtained through Confirmatory Factor Analysis technique (CFA). Reliability was estimated by composite reliability. Findings show that the construct validity and the reliability of the instrument are high. A thorough discussion on the findings and future implications are provided towards the end of this paper.

Keywords

construct validity; creative thinking skill; instrument development

Full Text:

Fulltext PDF

References

American Educational Research; Association American Psychological Association; & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1999). Standards for educational andpsychological testing. Washington, DC: AERA.

Barbot, B., Besançon, M., & Lubart, T. I. (2011). Assessing creativity in the classroom. The Open Education Journal, 4(1), 58–66.

Batey, M. (2012). The measurement of creativity: from definitional consensus to the introduction of a new heuristic framework. Creativity Research Journal, 24(1), 55–65.

Beghetto, R. A. (2013). Nurturing creativity in the micro-moments of the classroom. In K. H. Kim, J. C. Kaufman, J. Baer, & B. Sriraman (Eds.), Creatively Gifted Students are not like Other Gifted Students: Research, Theory, and Practice. Sense Publishers.

Breckler, S. J. (1990). Applications of covariance structure modeling in psychology: cause for concern. Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 260–273.

Cattell, R. B. (1978). The scientific use of factor analysis. New York: Plenum.

Charyton, C., Ivcevic, Z., Plucker, J. A., & Kaufman, J. C. (2009). Creativity assessment for evaluating the effectiveness of educational programs. In C. Schreiner (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Assessment Technologies, Methods, and Applications in Higher Education(pp. 78–96). Hershey: IGI Global.

DeHaan, R. L. (2009). Teaching creativity and inventive problem solving in science. Life Sciences Education, 8, 172–181.

Dettmer, P. (2006). New Blooms in established fields: Four domains of learning and doing. Roeper Review, 28(2), 70–78.

DiStefano, C., & Hess, B. (2005). Using confirmatory factor analysis for construct validation: An empirical review. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 23(3), 225–241.

Doll, W. J., Xia, W., & Torkzadeh, G. (1994). A confirmatory factor analysis of the end-user computing satisfaction instrument. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 18(4), 453–461.

Florida, R., Mellander, C., & Stolarick, K. (2011). Creativity and prosperity: The global creativity index. Toronto, Ontario, Kanada: Martin Prosperity Institute.

Gerbing, D. A., & Anderson, J. C. (1992). Monte Carlo evaluations of goodness of fit indices for structural equation models. Sociological Methods and Research, 21(2), 132–160.

Ghadi, I. N., Bakar, K. A., Alwi, N. H., & Talib, O. (2012). Construct validity examination of critical thinking dispositions for undergraduate students inUniversity Putra Malaysia. Higher Education Studies, 2(2), 138–145.

Gorsuch, R. L. (1983). Factor analysis (2nd ed.). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

Guilford, J. P. (1954). Psychometric methods (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Hadi, S. (2001). Metodologi research (Jilid III). Yogyakarta: Andi Offset.

Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Prentice Hall.

Hammitt, J. K., & Zhang, Y. (2013). Combining experts’ judgments: comparison of algorithmic methods. Risk Analysis, 33(1), 109–120.

Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cut off criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55.

Hu, W., & Adey, P. (2002). A scientific creativity test for secondary school students. International Journal of Science & Education, 24(4), 389–403.

Husain, M. Y., Mustapha, R., Malik, S., & Mustakim, S. S. (2014). Validation of instruments learning environment: exploratory factor analysis (EFA). In 10th Conference of AASVET (Asian Academic Society for Vocational Education and Training). Tokyo.

Isaksen, S. G., Dorval, K. B., & Treffinger, D. J. (1994). Creative approaches to problem solving. Dubuque: Kendall/Hun.

Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: an overview. theory into practice. Taylor & Francis, Ltd.

Lance, C. E., Butts, M. M., & Michels, L. C. (2006). The sources of four commonly reported cutoff criteria what did they really say? Organizational Research Methods, 9(2), 202–220.

Liang, J.-C. (2002). Exploring scientific creativity of eleventh grade students in Taiwan. The University of Texas at Austin. Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/470a/a97e1cd2c757315b9f9330abc15a7b4ca41a.pdf.

Messick, S. (1989). Validity. In R. L. Linn (Ed.), Educational Measurement (3rd ed., pp. 13–103). New York: American Council on Education/Collier Macmillan.

Mezo, P. G., & Short, M. M. (2012). Construct validity and confirmatory factor analysis of the self-control and self-management scale. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 44(1), 1–8.

Mooi, E., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). A concise guide to market research: the process, data, and methods using IBM SPSS Statistics. Springer-Verlag.

Nitko, A. J., & Brookhart, S. M. (2007). Educational assessment of students. New Jersey: Pearson Education.

Ramirez, R. P. B., & Ganaden, M. S. (2008). Creative activities and students’ higher order thinking skills. Education Quarterly, 66(1), 22–33.

Reynold, C. R., Livingstone, R. B., & Wilson, V. (2009). Measurement and assessment in education. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education Inc.

Rofi’uddin, A. (2000). Model pendidikan berpikir kritis-kreatif untuk siswa sekolah dasar. Majalah Bahasa Dan Seni, 1(28), 72–94.

Shook, C. L., Ketchen, D. J., Hult, G. T. M., & Kacmar, K. M. (2004). An assessment of the use of structural equation modeling in strategic management research. Strategic Management Journal, 25(4), 397–404.

Silverlake, A. C. (1999). Comprehending test manuals: a guide and workbook. Los Angeles: Pyrczak Publishing.

Sternberg, R. J. (2006). The nature of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 18(1), 87–98. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj1801_10

Subali, B. (2011). Pengukuran kreativitas keterampilan proses sains dalam konteks assessment. Cakrawala Pendidikan, XXX(1), 130–144.

Suryabrata, S. (2000). Pengembangan alat ukur psikologis. Yogyakarta: Andi.

Thompson, B., & Daniel, L. G. (1996). Factor analytic evidence for the construct validity of scores: A historical overview and some guidelines. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56, 197–208.

Van Dalen, D. B. (1973). Understanding educational research: an introduction. McGraw-Hill.

Widowati, A. (2009). Pengembangan critical thinking melalui penerapan model PBL (problem based learning) dalam pembelajaran sains. In Seminar Nasional Penelitian, Pendidikan dan Penerapan MIPA. Yogyakarta: Fakultas MIPA, Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta.

Wiersma, W. (2000). Research methods in education: an introduction (7th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21831/pep.v22i2.22369