Premium
Psychometric Re‐evaluation of the Image of Science and Scientists Scale (ISSS)
Author(s) -
Marshall Carolyn E.,
Blalock Cheryl L.,
Liu Yan,
Pruski Linda A.,
Toepperwein Mary Anne,
Owen Steven V.,
Lichtenstein Michael J.
Publication year - 2007
Publication title -
school science and mathematics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.135
H-Index - 2
eISSN - 1949-8594
pISSN - 0036-6803
DOI - 10.1111/j.1949-8594.2007.tb17929.x
Subject(s) - science education , scale (ratio) , confirmatory factor analysis , psychology , construct (python library) , mathematics education , computer science , structural equation modeling , mathematics , statistics , cartography , geography , programming language
An enduring concern among science education researchers is the “swing away from science” (Osborne. 2003). One of their central dilemmas is to identify—or construct—a valid outcome measure that could assess curricular effectiveness, and predict students' choices of science courses, university majors, or careers in science. Many instruments have been created and variably evaluated. The primary purpose of this paper was to re‐evaluate the psychometric properties of the Image of Science and Scientists Scale (ISSS) (Krajkovich 1978). In the current study, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to examine the dimensionality of the 29‐item ISSS, which was administered to 531 middle school students in three San Antonio. Texas school districts at the beginning of the 2004–2005 school year. The results failed to confirm the presumed 1‐factor structure of the ISSS. but instead showed a 3‐factor structure with only marginal fit with the data, even after removal of 12 inadequate items. The three dimensions were “Positive Images of Scientists” (5 items). “Negative Images of Scientists” (9 items), and “Science Avocation” (3 items). The results do not support use of the original form of the ISSS for measuring “attitudes toward science,”“images of scientists. “or “scientific attitudes. “Shortening the scale from 29 to 17 items makes it more feasible to use in a classroom setting. Determining whether the three dimensions identified in our analysis. “Positive Images of Scientists. ““Negative Images of Scientists. “and “Science Avocation “contain useful assessments of middle school student impressions and attitudes will require independent investigation in other samples.