PDF (Español (España))
FLIP
Authors who publish in this journal agree to the following terms:
Acta Colombiana de Psicología complies with international intellectual property and copyright laws, and particularly with Article No. 58 of the Political Constitution of Colombia, Law No. 23 of 1982, and the Agreement No. 172 of September 30, 2010 (Universidad Católica de Colombia Intellectual Property Regulation).
Authors retain their copyright and grant to the Acta Colombiana de Psicología the right of first publication, with the work registered under Creative Commons attribution license, which allows third parties to use the published material, provided they credit the authorship of the work and the first publication in this Journal.
Abstract
This article presents the results of a research project aimed to identify reliability and validity indicators for the abbreviated version of the Cuestionario de Estrategias para la Escritura de Ensayos [Questionnaire on Strategies for Essay Writing] (Meneses Baez & Salvador Mata, 2006) consisting of 37 Likert-type items (1 = never and 4 = always) which measures planning, transcript review and meta cognition and was administered to 540 undergraduate student volunteers. The analysis was performed with 486 students who obtained no extreme scores. Reliability and validity indicators were estimated using Rasch model and evidence for criterion validity. Results support unidimensionality and measurement adjustment; Rash coefficients for internal consistency and reliability for people and items were>.90; separation statistics for people and items were >2; items were distributed along the Rash rule; response categories with monotonous progression and appropriate distance between categories; correlations between the CEEEA-37 and the Self-regulation and Self-efficacy Perception Scales on writing were> 0.5 (p <.05). This test can help improve assessment and intervention in writing argumentative essays in college. Items with greater level of difficulty should be constructed and another field study should be carried out.
References
Bereiter, C. & Scardamalia, M. (1987). The Psychology of Written Composition. Hillsdale. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Breetvelt, I, Van den Bergh, H. & Rijlaarsdam, G. (1994). Relations between writing processes and text quality: When and how? Cognition and Instruction 12, 103-123.
Bond, T.G. & Fox, C.M. (2007). Applying the Rasch Model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences. (2nd Ed.) Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum Associates.
Campbell, D. T. & Fiske D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin. 56, 81-105.
Camps, A. Miliam, M. (2000). La actividad metalingüística en el aprendizaje de la escritura. M. Miliam & A. Camps (eds.) El Papel de la Actividad Metalingüística en el Aprendizaje de la Escritura. Rosario, Santafé, Argentina: Homo Sapiens.
Conrad, K. J., Conrad, K. M., Riley, B.B. and Funk, R. (2011). Validation of the Substance Problem Scale (SPS) to the Rasch Measurement Model, GAIN Methods Report. Chicago, IL: Chestnut Health Systems, 1-32.
Conrad, K. J., Iris, M., Ridings, J. W. Langley, K. & Wilber, K. (2010). Self-report Measure of Financial Explotation of Older Adults. The Gerentologist, 50, 6, 758-773. doi:10.1093/geront/gnq054.
Conrad, K. J., Dennis, M.L., Bezruczko, N. & Funk, R. (2007). Substance use disorder symptoms: Evidence of differential item functioning by age. Journal of Applied Measurement, 8 (4), 373-387.
Conrad, K.J. & Smith, E.V. (2004). International conference on objective measurement: Applications of Rasch analysis in health care. Medical Care, 2004; 42 (suppl I) 1-6.
Crocker, L. & Algina, J. (1986). Introduction to Classical and Modern Test Theory. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers.
Elosua, P. & López Jáuregui, A. (2007). Aplicación de cuatro procedimientos de detección de funcionamiento diferencial sobre ítems politómicos. Psicothema, 19, 002, 329-336.
Graham, S., Shwartz, S. y MacArthur, C. (1993). Learning disabled students and normally achieving student´s knowledge of writing and the composing process, attitude toward writing, and self-efficacy for students with and without learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 26, 237-249.
Green, K. E. & Frantom, C.G. (2002). Survey development and validation with the Rasch model. A paper presented at the International Conference on Questionnaire Development Evaluation, and Testing, Charleston SC, November 14-17.
Flower, L. S. & Hayes, J. R., (1981). A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 32, 365-387.
Flower, L. S. & Hayes, J. R., (1980). The dynamics of composing: Making plans and juggling constraints. In L. W. Greeg & E. R. Steinberg (Eds.), Cognitive Processes in Writing. 31-50. Hillsdale, N. J.: Erlbaum.
Frias, M. (1996). Procesos Creativos para la construcción de textos. Bogotá, Colombia: Cooperativa Magisterio.
Hambleton, R. y Jones R. (1993). Comparison of Classical Test Theory and Item Response Theory and Their Application to Test Development. ITEMS: The Instructional Topics in Educational Measurement Series, 12 (3), 253-262.
Harris, D. (1989). Comparison of 1-, 2-, and 3-Parameter IRT Models. ITEMS: The Instructional Topics in Educational Measurement Series, 8 (1), 35-41.
Hayes, J.R. (1996). A new framework for understanding cognition and affect in writing. In C. M. Levy, & S. Ransdell (Eds.), The science of writing: Theories, methods, individual differences and applications (pp. 1–27). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hayes, J. R., & Flower, L. S. (1980). Identifying the organization of writing process. In L. W. Greeg & E. R. Steinberg (Eds.), Cognitive Process in Writing. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hounsell, D. (1997). Contrasting Conceptions of Essay-Writing in The Experience of Learning: Implications for Teaching and Studying in Higher Education, Ed. R. Marton; D. Hounsell & N. Entwistle, p. 106-125, Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press, 0-7073-0749-X.
Linacre, L. M. (2012a). Winsteps Tutorial 4. June. Recuperado de http://www.winsteps.com/a/winsteps-tutorial-4.pdf en enero 12 de 2012.
Linacre, L. M. (2012b). Winsteps Tutorial 3. June. Recuperado de http://www.winsteps.com/a/winsteps-tutorial-3.pdf en enero 12 de 2012.
Linacre, L. M. (2012c). Winsteps Tutorial 2. June. Recuperado de http://www.winsteps.com/a/winsteps-tutorial-2.pdf enero 12 de 2012.
Linacre, J.M. (2011). Winsteps Rasch Measurement (Version 3.73.0). https://www.winsteps.com. Author.
Linacre J.M. (2006). Data Variance Explained by Measures, Rasch Measurement Transactions, 20:1 p. 1045.
Linacre, J.M. (2002). Optimizing Rating Scale Category Effectiveness. Journal of Applied Measurement 3, 1, 85-106.
Linacre, J. M. (1999). Investigating Rating Scale Category Utility. Journal of Outcome Measurement. 3, 2, 103-122.
Linacre, J.M. (1998). Structure in Rasch residuals: Why principal components analysis (PCA)? Rasch Measurement Transactions, 1 (2), 636.
Meneses Báez, A. L., Hernández, C., Lesser-Sanabria, N. & Sáenz-Correal (2009). Procesos cognitivos implicados en la construcción de un ensayo en estudiantes universitarios. Cuadernos Hispanoamericanos de Psicología, 10, 2, 7-19.
Meneses Báez, A. L. & Salvador Mata, F. (2006). Procesos cognitivos en la escritura de estudiantes universitarios. Departamento de Psicología Evolutiva y de la Comunicación: Universidad de Vigo.
Meneses Báez, A. L., Salvador Mata, F. & Ravelo, E. R. (2007. Descripción de los procesos cognitivos implicados en la escritura de un ensayo. Acta Colombiana de Psicología, 10 (1), 83-98.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric Theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Pardo, C. y Rocha, M. (2010). Manual para el procesamiento y análisis de datos aplicación piloto. En Compendio de los manuales del Serce. Oficina Regional de Educación para América Latina y el Caribe (OREALC/UNESCO Santiago) y del Laboratorio Latinoamericano de Evaluación de la Calidad de la Educación (LLECE), 225-263.
Pintrich, P. R., Simith, D., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1993). Reliability and predictive validity of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53 (3), 801-813.
Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1991). A Manual for the Use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). Ann Arbor, MI: National Center for Research to Improve Postsecondary Teaching and Learning.
Read, B. & Francis, B. (2001). Playing safe: undergraduate essay writing and the presentation of the student voice. British Journal of Sociology of Education. 22, 387-399.
Reckase, M. (1979). Unifactor latent trait models applied to multifactor tests: Results and implications. Journal of Educational Statistics, 4, 207-230.
Rijlaarsdam, G., Couzijn, M., Janssen, T., Braaksma, M. & Kieft, M. (2006). Writing experiment manuals in science education: the impact of writing, genre, and audience. International Journal of Science Education, 28, 2-3, 203-233.
Rau, P. S., & Sebrechts, M. M. (1996). How initial plans mediate the expansion and resolution of options in writing. The Quaterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 49, 616-638.
Salvador Mata, S. (2005). Procesos cognitivos en la expresión escrita: modelos teóricos e investigación empírica. F. S. Salvador Mata (ed.). La expresión escrita de alumnos con necesidades especiales: Procesos Cognitivos. Archidona (Málaga): Ediciones Aljibe.
Smith, E.V. (2002). Detecting and evaluating the impact of multidimensionality using item fit statistics and principal component analysis of residuals. Journal of Applied Measurement, 3 (2), 205-231.
Tolchinsky, L. (2000). Distintas perspectivas acerca del objeto y propósito del trabajo y la reflexión metalingüística en la escritura académica. M. Miliam & A. Camps (eds.) El Papel de la Actividad Metalingüística en el Aprendizaje de la Escritura. Rosario, Santa Fe, Argentina: Homo Sapiens.
Torrance, M., & Galbraith, D. (2006). The processing demands of writing. In MacArthur, C. , Graham, S., & Fitzgerald, J. (Eds.). Handbook of Writing Research. New York, NY: Guilford Publications.
Torrance, M., Thomas, G. V., Robinson, E. J. (2000). Individual differences in undergraduate essay-writing strategies: A longitudinal study. Higher Education, 39, 181-200.
Torres, I. C. (2004). Una Mirada pedagógica a la escritura de un ensayo argumentativo. Revista Estudios Sociales, 19, 97-105.
Van den Bergh, H. & Rijlaarsdam, G. (1999). The dynamics of idea generation during writing: An online study. In M. Torrance, & D. Galbraith (Eds.), Studies in writing. Vol.4. Knowing what to write: Cognitive perspectives on conceptual processes in text production (p.99-120) Amsterdam University Press.
Whitaker, D., Berninger, V. Johnston, J. & Swanson, H. L. (1994) Intra individual differences in levels of language in intermediate grade writers – implications for the translating process. Learning and Individual differences 6, 107-130.
Wilson, M. (2005). Constructing measures: An item response modeling approach. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum Associates.
