Elliott, J W; Perkins, M and Thevenin, M K (2018) Measuring undergraduate students’ construction education domain self-efficacy, motivation, and planned behavior: Validation of a concise survey instrument. International Journal of Construction Education and Research, 14(4), pp. 235-256. ISSN 1557-8771
Abstract
Reducing attrition in education and training is an important strategy for addressing unmet U.S. construction industry workforce demands. This study investigated the psychometric properties of a more concise construction-domain specific survey instrument, the Construction Training Attitudes and Intentions Scale (CTAIS), using Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). Results yielded an abbreviated 28-item instrument and 4-factor model. CTAIS factors; Construction Education Self-Efficacy (CESE), Motivation (CEM), Planned Effort (CEPE) and Perceived Completion Value (CECV) were tested for convergent, discriminant, and known-groups validity. Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) was conducted initially to confirm the instrument’s factor structure. CFA was employed to compare the hypothesized four-factor model to a single-factor model; fit indices were acceptable with nine items removed given discrepancies. Based on the demonstrated instrument reliability and validity, the abbreviated CTAIS provides a useful quantitative metric that can be completed quickly by participants while still assessing the constructs shown to predict education performance and attrition within the specific domain of construction training and education.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | confirmatory factor analysis; construction workforce development; instrument validation |
| Index terms: | exploratory factor analysis, motivation, confirmatory factor analysis, survey, strategy, validation, workforce development, construction education, validity, undergraduate, planned behaviour, education and training, self-efficacy, construction industry |
| Subjects: | professional education, behavioral psychology, evaluation and assessment methods, human factors and perception, psychology, curriculum development, management, professional development, statistical analysis, industry analysis, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Education, Human Resources, Research Practice, Information Management, Business Strategy |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here