Development, validation, and factorial comparison of the McGill Self-Efficacy of Learners For Inquiry Engagement (McSELFIE) survey in natural science disciplines

ABSTRACT

Sociocognitive theory [Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall; Bandura, A. (1989). Human agency in social cognitive theory. American Psychologist, 44, 1175–1184. doi:10.1037/0003-066x.44.9.1175; Bandura, A. (1991). Social cognitive theory of self-regulation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 248–287. doi:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90022-L] accords high importance to the mechanisms of human agency and how they are exercised through self-efficacy. In this paper, we developed and validated the McGill Self-Efficacy For Inquiry Engagement (McSELFIE) instrument with undergraduate students in natural science disciplines. We defined inquiry engagement as carrying out the practices of science (POS) that are supported by students’ personality characteristics (SPCs) and that result in achieving inquiry-learning outcomes (ILOs). Based on these theoretical perspectives, the McSELFIE is a 60-item, learner-focused survey that addresses three components that are theoretically important for engaging in scientific inquiry: (a) SPCs, (b) ILOs, and (c) POS. Evidence for construct and content validity were obtained by using experts’ judgments and confirmatory factor analysis with a sample of 110 undergraduate students enrolled in science disciplines. Internal consistency of the factors and instrument was also examined. The McSELFIE instrument is a reliable and valid instrument for measuring science undergraduate students’ self-efficacy for inquiry engagement. Matched pairs analyses were conducted among the instruments’ factors. Students reported the highest self-efficacy for openness, applying knowledge, and carrying out investigations. Students reported the lowest self-efficacy for extraversion, understanding metacognitive knowledge, and planning investigations. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

KEYWORDS:

• NGSS
• practices of science
• self-efficacy
• scientific inquiry
• science education

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.