Volume 9, Issue 5 (2021)
Health Educ Health Promot 2021, 9(5): 529-533 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Cjuno J, Velasquez N, Bazan-Palomino E, Carranza R, Hernández R. Psychometrics of the Brief Scale of Autonomous Learning in University Students. Health Educ Health Promot 2021; 9 (5) :529-533
URL: http://hehp.modares.ac.ir/article-5-56402-en.html
URL: http://hehp.modares.ac.ir/article-5-56402-en.html
1- Universidad Cesar Vallejo, Escuela de Medicina, Piura, Perú , jccjunoc@ucvvirtual.edu.pe
2- Universidad Católica Los Ángeles de Chimbote, Escuela de Educación, Chimbote, Perú
3- Universidad Cesar Vallejo, Escuela de Medicina, Piura, Perú
4- Universidad San Ignacio de Loyola, Facultad de Humanidades, Lima, Perú
5- Unidad de Virtualización Académica, Universidad de San Martín de Porres, Lima, Perú
2- Universidad Católica Los Ángeles de Chimbote, Escuela de Educación, Chimbote, Perú
3- Universidad Cesar Vallejo, Escuela de Medicina, Piura, Perú
4- Universidad San Ignacio de Loyola, Facultad de Humanidades, Lima, Perú
5- Unidad de Virtualización Académica, Universidad de San Martín de Porres, Lima, Perú
Abstract: (729 Views)
Aims: The use of WhatsApp can develop autonomous learning, however, there are still no tools that can measure it. This study was performed with the aim to analyze the psychometric properties of the Abbreviated Scale of Autonomous Learning with the use of WhatsApp in Peruvian university students.
Materials & Methods: In this instrumental study, in a non-probabilistic sample (n=411) of students, An exploratory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and reliability were estimated.
Findings: The statistics report that the AFE are acceptable and significant KMO (0.816) and Bartlett's test (1431.09; gl=6; p=0.0001). Robust analyses (χ2=24.180; p=0.0001; TLI=0.955; CFI=0.998; GFI=0.998; AGFI=0.994, and RMSR=0.043), show that the unidimensional structure acceptable and reported an internal consistency of 0.932.
Conclusion: The EBAA-4 is valid and reliable. Therefore, its use is recommended for university students.
Materials & Methods: In this instrumental study, in a non-probabilistic sample (n=411) of students, An exploratory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and reliability were estimated.
Findings: The statistics report that the AFE are acceptable and significant KMO (0.816) and Bartlett's test (1431.09; gl=6; p=0.0001). Robust analyses (χ2=24.180; p=0.0001; TLI=0.955; CFI=0.998; GFI=0.998; AGFI=0.994, and RMSR=0.043), show that the unidimensional structure acceptable and reported an internal consistency of 0.932.
Conclusion: The EBAA-4 is valid and reliable. Therefore, its use is recommended for university students.
Article Type: Short Communication |
Subject:
Health Communication
Received: 2021/10/16 | Accepted: 2021/12/9 | Published: 2022/02/10
Received: 2021/10/16 | Accepted: 2021/12/9 | Published: 2022/02/10
References
1. Aebli H. Teaching factors that favor autonomous learning. Revista Complutense de Educación. 1991;1(1):365. [Spanish] [Link]
2. Chicas FA. Pedagogy for the development of autonomous learning. Universidad EAN; 2011. [Link]
3. Businessofapps. WhatsApp Usage and Revenue Statistics (2020)- App Business [Software]. Business apps; Unknown Year [Unknown Cited]. Available from: https://www.businessofapps.com/data/whatsapp-statistics/ [Link]
4. Gómez Hurtado I, García Prieto FJ, Delgado García M. Use of the social network facebook as a learning tool in university students: an integrated study on perceptions. Perspectiva Educacional. 2018;57(1):99-119. [Spanish] [Link] [DOI:10.4151/07189729-Vol.57-Iss.1-Art.645]
5. Alcibar MF, Monroy A, Jiménez M. Impact and use of information and communication technologies in higher education. Informacion Tecnologica. 2018;29(5):101-10. [Spanish] [Link] [DOI:10.4067/S0718-07642018000500101]
6. Eid MIM, Al-Jabri IM. Social networking, knowledge sharing, and student learning: The case of university students. Comput Educ. 2016;99:14-27. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.compedu.2016.04.007]
7. Pinto M. Social networks for collaborative learning. Revista de Difusión cultural y científica de la Universidad La Salle en Bolivia. 2010;4(4). [Spanish] [Link]
8. Zhoc KCH, Chen G. Reliability and validity evidence for the Self-Directed Learning Scale (SDLS). Learn Individ Diff. 2016;49:245-50. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.lindif.2016.06.013]
9. Domínguez-Lara SA, Merino-Soto C. Why is it important to report Cronbach's alpha coefficient confidence intervals?. Revista Latinoamericana de ciencias sociales, Niñez y Juventud. 2015;13(2). [Spanish] [Link]
10. World Medical Association. WMA Declaration of Helsinki-Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. Ferney-Voltaire: World Medical Association; 2015. [Link]
11. Pérez ER, Medrano L. Exploratory factor analysis: conceptual and methodological basis review article. Revista Argentina de Ciencias del Comportamiento. 2010;2(1):58-66. [Spanish] [Link]
12. Pollard CA, Morran MP, Nestor-Kalinoski AL. The covid-19 pandemic: A global health crisis. Physiol Genomics. 2020;52(11):549-57. [Link] [DOI:10.1152/physiolgenomics.00089.2020] [PMID] [PMCID]
13. Ventura-León J. Back to content-based validity. Addictions. 2019;1213. [Link]
14. Reio TG, Shuck B. Exploratory factor analysis: implications for theory, research, and practice. Adv Dev Human Resour. 2015;17(1):12-25. [Link] [DOI:10.1177/1523422314559804]
15. Mcdowell I. Measuring health: a guide to rating scales and questionnaires. 3rd Edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2006. [Link]
16. Hambleton RK, Merenda PF, Spielberger CD. Adapting educational and psychological tests for cross-cultural assessment. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2005. [Link] [DOI:10.4324/9781410611758]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |