The validity and reliability of the self-directed learning instrument (SDLI) in mainland Chinese nursing students

Wang-Qin Shen, Hong-Lin Chen, Yan Hu, Wang-Qin Shen, Hong-Lin Chen, Yan Hu

Abstract

Background: Self-directed learning is crucial to the professional development of nursing students, and which enables them to expand the knowledge and enhance the quality of their practice. A validated self-directed learning instrument is important not only in assessing the individual's self-directed learning level, but also in evaluating the effectiveness of teaching or learning methods. The aim of this study is to evaluate the validity and reliability of the SDLI in mainland Chinese nursing students.

Methods: A cross-sectional design with convenience sampling was used to recruit participants from three nursing schools. The mainland Chinese version of SDLI was tested with respect to validity and reliability in 1,499 nursing students, and another 30 nursing students were invited to evaluate the test-retest reliability of the scale in 7 days interval.

Results: Explorary factor analysis identified a four-factor structure, accounting for 56.101% of the total variance. The confirmatory factor analysis showed a good overall fit of this four-factor model. Convergent validity was supported by the highly positive Pearson's correlation between SDLI score and SRSSDL score (r = .876, p = .000). Cronbach's alpha for internal consistency of overall scale was .916, and 4 dimensions were between .755-.825.The test-retest reliability of overall scale was .850, and 4 dimensions were between .708-.821. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of overall scale was .916, and 4 dimensions were .822-.889.

Conclusions: This study indicates that the SDLI is a valid and reliable instrument for assessing self-directed learning in mainland Chinese nursing students. Nurse educators could use such knowledge to develop their roles and plan to support nursing students in becoming self-directed learners and lifelong learner.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Confimatory factor analysis model of the SDLI.

References

    1. Tracy L, Levett J. Self-directed learning: implications and limitations for undergraduate nursing education. Nurse Educ Today. 2005;25:363–368.
    1. Jennings SF. Personal development plans and self-directed learning for health care professionals: are they evidence based? Postgrad Med J. 2007;83:518–524.
    1. Fry J. Interactive relationship between inquisitiveness and student control of instruction. J Educ Psychology. 1972;63:459–465.
    1. Rosenblum S, Darkenwald G. Effects of adult learner participation in course planning on achievement and satisfaction. Adult Educ Quarterly. 1983;33:147–153.
    1. Geis G. Student participation in instruction: student choice. J Higher Educ. 1976;47:249–273.
    1. Smedly A. The self-directed learning readiness of first year bachelor of nursing students. J Res Nurs. 2007;12:373.
    1. Hinchliff S. The practitioner as teacher. 3. London, UK: Elsevier; 2004.
    1. Knowles M. Self-Directed learning: a Guide for Learners and Teachers. New York: Association Press; 1975.
    1. Abd-El-Fattah SM. Garrison’s model of self-directed learning: preliminary validation and relationship to academic achievement. Span J Psychol. 2010;13(2):586–596.
    1. Cheng SF, Kuo CL, Lin KC, Jane LH. Development and preliminary testing of a self-rating instrument to measure self-directed learning ability of nursing students. Int J Nurs Stud. 2010;47(9):1152–1158.
    1. Williamson SN. Development of a self-rating scale of self-directed learning. Nurse Res. 2007;14(2):66–83.
    1. Adelaida Z. Review: Self-Rating Scale of Self-Directed Learning (SRSSDL): preliminary results from the Italian validation process. J Res Nurs. 2010;16(4):375–376.
    1. Shen WQ, Yan H. The reliability and validity of self-rating scale for self-directedness in learning (in Chinese) Chinese J Nurs. 2011;46(12):1211–1213.
    1. Cadorin L, Bortoluzzi G, Palese A. The Self-Rating Scale of Self-Directed Learning (SRSSDL): a factor analysis. Nurs Educ Today. 2013;33:1511–1516.
    1. Cadorin L, Suter N, Dante A, Williamson SN, Devetti A, Palese A. Self-directed learning competence assessment within different healthcare professionals and amongst students in Italy. Nurse Educ Pract. 2013;12:153–158.
    1. Cohen J. The statistical power of abnormal-social psychological research: a review. J Abnorm Soc Psychol. 1962;65:145–153.
    1. Si T, Shu L, Su YA, Tian CH, Yan J, Cheng J, Li XN, Liu Q, Ma YT, Zhang WH, Zhang HY. The Chinese version of the Personal and Social Performance Scale (PSP): validity and reliability. Psychiatry Res. 2011;185:275–279.
    1. Fabrigar LR, Wegener DT, MacCallum RC, Strahan EJ. Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychos methods. 1999;4:272–299.
    1. Spicer J. Making sense of multivariate data analysis. London: Sage; 2005.
    1. Cox EO, Green KE, Seo H, Inaba M, Quillen AA. Coping with late-life challenges: development and validation of the care-receiver efficacy scale. Gerontologist. 2006;46:640–649.
    1. Lopez FG, Rice KG. Preliminary development and validation of a measure of relationship authenticity. J Couns Psychol. 2006;53:362–371.
    1. Polit DF, Beck CT. Essentials of Nursing Research: Methods, Appraisal, and Utilization. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2006.
    1. de Vet HCW, Terwee CB, Knol DL, Bouter LM. When to use agreement versus reliability measures. J Clin Epidemiol. 2006;59:1033–1039.
    1. Lin Y-H, Wang LS. A Chinese version of the revised nursed professional values scale: reliability and validity assessment. Nurse Educ Today. 2010;30:492–498.
    1. Polit DF, Beck CT. Essentials of nursing research: methods, appraisals, and utilization. Philadelphia: Lippincott; 2004.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors en medewerkers

Medische omstandigheden

Geneesmiddelinterventies

3
Abonneren