Printer Friendly

Internal Consistency Reliabilities for 14 Computer Attitude Scales.

A compendium of 14 previously-published instruments for assessing teachers' attitudes toward computers was administered to 621 educators in Texas, Florida, New York, and California during 1995-96. A total of 284 items extracted from 14 previously published instruments, and falling on 32 subscales, were included on the instrument titled the Teachers' Attitude Toward Computers Questionnaire (TAC). Since many of the subscales were a decade old, an initial question to be resolved was whether the scales, as originally, published were still reliable. This article focuses on that question.

Positive teacher attitudes toward computers are widely recognized as a necessary condition for effective use of information technology in the classroom (Woodrow, 1992). At least 14 instruments with acceptable measurement properties have been reported in the literature over the past decade (Chu & Spires, 1991; D'Souza, 1992; Francis, 1993; Gardner, Discenza, & Dukes, 1993; Kay, 1993; Knezek & Miyashita, 1994; Loyd & Gressard, 1984; Pelgrum, Janssen Reinen & Plomp, 1993; Woodrow, 1991). This article contains a description of how well each instrument measures what it claims to assess. The question is addressed for three related groups, notably: (a) preservice teachers, (b) practicing K-12 teachers, and (c) teacher educators.

INSTRUMENTATION

The Teachers' Attitudes Toward Computers Questionnaire (TAC) was used for this research. It is a 10-part composite instrument including 284 items spanning 32 Likert and Semantic Differential subscales (Christensen & Knezek, 1996). The following 14 computer attitude questionnaires contributed to the TAC:

Computer Attitude Scale (Gressard & Loyd, 1986) *confidence, liking, anxiety, and usefulness

The Computer Use Questionnaire (Griswold, 1983) *awareness

Attitudes Toward Computers Scale (Reece & Gable, 1982) *general attitudes toward computers

The Computer Survey Scale (Stevens, 1982) *efficacy and anxiety

Computer Anxiety Rating Scale (CARS) (Heinssen, Glass, & Knight, 1987) *technical capability, appeal of learning and using computers, being controlled by computers, learning computer skills, traits to overcome anxiety.

ATC (Attitudes Toward Computers) (Raub, 1981) *computer usage, computer appreciation, societal impact CAIN (Computer Anxiety Index) (Maurer & Simonson, 1984) *examines avoidance of, negative attitudes toward, caution with, and disinterest in computers (anxiety and comfort)

BELCAT (Blombert-Ericson-Lowery Computer Attitude Task) (Erickson, 1987) *attitudes toward learning about computers and towards computers them selves

Attitude Toward Computer Scale (Francis, 1993) *affective domain

Computer Attitude Measure (CAM) (Kay, 1993) *cognitive (student, personal, general), affective, behavioral (classroom and home), and perceived control components of computerattitudes

Computer Attitude Questionnaire (CAQ) (Knezek & Miyashita, 1994) *computer importance, computer enjoyment, computer anxiety, computer seclusion

Computer Attitude Items (Pelgrum, Janssen Reinen, & Plomp, 1993) *computer relevance, computer enjoyment

Computer Attitudes Scale for Secondary Students (CASS) (Jones & Clarke, 1994) *cognitive, affective and behavioral attitudes

E-Mail (D'Souza, 1992) *attitudes toward e-mail

Subjects

In Texas, Florida, New York, and California, 621 educators completed the TAC during 1995-96. Most were K-12 educators from seven school districts spanning the regions of North, South, East, and West Texas. Small samplings of K-12 educators from California and Florida were included in the group as well. University faculty from two universities in Texas and one from Florida also provided data for the study. Preservice educators from a university in the northern region of Texas and one in the southern region of Texas were also represented. Table 1 shows the number of respondents falling in each of the categories of K-12 educators, preservice teachers, and university faculty.

Results

Table 1 lists the name, place of origin, and 1995-96 internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's Alpha) by K-12 teacher, preservice teacher, and teacher educator group, plus the original reliability (if published) for 32 subscales included on the TAC. Results indicate that most of the attitudinal subscales that were originally strong have held up well over time. However, there are notable exceptions, such as the widely-used Loyd & Gressard Confidence subscale, with an internal consistency reliability of .86 reported in 1986, but an average alpha of .75 (which is still respectable) in 1995-96.

Several lesser-known attitudinal subscales that exhibit high reliabilities and would appear to warrant wider use are listed in Table 2. Especially worthy are those subscales which exhibit high reliability without excessive length. These are the Computer Anxiety subscale (CA) from the BELCAT (Blombert-Erickson-Lowery Computer Attitude Task) (Erickson, 1987); E-mail for Classroom Learning (D'Souza, 1992); the Semantic Differential subscale (KSD) from the Computer Attitude Measure (Kay, 1993); subscale 'A' from the Computer Attitudes Scale for Secondary Students (CASS) (Jones & Clarke, 1994); the Attitudes Toward Computers subscale (ATC) (Raub, 1981); the Computer Enjoyment subscale (ENJ) from Pelgrum, Janssen, Reinen, & Plomp (1993); Kay's (1993) Teacher subscale (KT) of the Computer Attitude Measure; the Anxiety subscale (Anxiety) of the Computer Attitude Questionnaire (Knezek & Miyashita, 1994); and the Anxiety subscale (CASA) of the Computer Attitude Scale (Loyd & Gressard, 1984). Items for each of these ar e listed in the Appendix.

References

Christensen, R., & Knezek, G. (1996). Constructing the teachers' attitudes toward computers (TAC) questionnaire. Paper presented to the Southwest Educational Research Association Annual Conference, New Orleans, LA.

Chu, P.C., & Spires, E.E. (1991). Validating the computer anxiety rating scale: Effects of cognitive style and computer courses on computer anxiety. Computers in Human Behavior, 7, 7-21.

DeVellis, R.F. (1991). Scale Development. Newbury Park, NJ: Sage.

D'Souza, P. V. (1992, Winter). E-mail's role in the learning process: A case study. Journal of Research on Computers in Education 25(1), 256-264.

Erickson, T.E. (1987). Sex differences in student attitudes towards computers. Paper presented to the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association.

Francis, L.J. (1993). Measuring attitude toward computers among undergraduate college students: The affective domain. Computers in Education 20(3), 251-255.

Gardner, D.G., Discenza, R., & Dukes, R.L. (1993). The measurement of computer attitudes: An empirical comparison of available scales. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 9(4), 487-507.

Gressard, C.P., & Loyd, B.H. (1986). Validation studies of a new computer attitude scale. Association for Educational Data Systems Journal, 18(4), 295-301.

Griswold, P.A. (1983). Some determinants of computer awareness among education majors. Association for Educational Data Systems Journal, 16(2), 92-103.

Heinssen, R.K, Jr., Glass, C.R., & Knight, L.A. (1987). Assessing computer anxiety: Development and validation of the computer anxiety rating scale. Computers in Human Behavior, 3, 49-59.

Jones, T., & Clarke, V.A. (1994). A computer attitude scale for secondary students. Computers in Education, 22(4), 315-318.

Kay, R.H. (1993). An exploration of theoretical and practical foundations for assessing attitudes toward computers: The computer attitude measure (CAM). Computers in Human Behavior, 9, 371-386.

Knezek, G.A., & Miyashita, K.T. (1994). A preliminary study of the computer attitude questionnaire. Studies on Children and Computers. Denton, TX: Texas Center for Educational Technology.

Loyd, B.H., & Gressard, C P. (1984). Reliability and factoral validity of computer attitude scale. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 44(2), 501-505.

Maurer, M., & Simonson, M. (1984). Development of validation of a measure of computer anxiety. In M. Simonson (Ed.), Proceedings of selected research paper presentations. Annual Meeting of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Dallas, TX.

Pelgrum, W.J., Janssen Reinen, I.A.M., & Plomp, Tj. (1993). Schools, teachers, students, and computers: A cross-national perspective. Twente, Netherlands: I.E.A.

Raub, A.C. (1981). Correlates of computer anxiety in college students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.

Reece, M.J., & Gable, R.K. (1982). The development and validation of a measure of general attitudes toward computers. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 42, 913-916.

Stevens, D.J.. (1982). Educators perceptions of computers in education: 1979 and 1982. Association for Educational Data Systems Journal, 145(1), 1-15.

Woodrow, J.R.J. (1991). A comparison of four computer attitude scales. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 7(2), 165-187.

Woodrow, J.E. (1992). The influence of programming training on the computer literacy and attitudes of preservice teachers. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 25(2), 200-218.
 Internal Consistencey
 Reliabilities for 32 TAC Subscales
Scale # Items Combined K-12 teachers
 n=621 n=436
I (Knezek & Miyashita Importance) 7 .81 .84
J (Knezek & Miyashita Enjoyment) 9 .84 .87
Anxiety (Knezek & Miyashita Anxiety) 8 .91 .91
CASA (Loyd & Gressard Anxiety) 9 .91 .91
CASC (Loyd & Gressard Confidence) 10 .81 .81
CASU (Loyd & Gressard Liking) 10 .89 .90
CASU (Loyd & Gressard Usefulness) 10 .85 .85
REL (Pelgrum & Plomp Relevance) 7 .81 .81
ENJ (Pelgrum & Plomp Enjoyment) 9 .89 .88
CA (Compater Anxiety) 20 .95 .95
U (Utility) 7 .87 .88
MD (Male Domain) 6 .78 .78
S (Success) 4 .78 .77
NI (Negative Impact) 6 .77 .77
MOT (Motivation) 4 .82 .82
PI (Productivity Importance) 4 .87 .88
CUQ (Computer Use Questionnaire) 14 .72 .73
CSS (Computer Survey Scale) 8 .73 .75
ATC (Francis Attitude Toward Computers) 16 .91 .92
KS (Kay CAM Student) 5 .87 .89
KSD (Kay CAM Semantic Differential) 10 .93 .93
KT (Kay CAM Teacher) 5 .91 .93
CARSA (Technical Capability) 6 .73 .74
CARSB (Appeal of learning aboal using
computers) 4 .82 .85
CARSC (Being controlled by computers) 3 .59 .60
CARSD (Learning computer skills) 3 .68 .71
CARSE (Traits to overcame anxiety) 2 .46 .50
CASSA (Affective) 15 .94 .94
CASSB (Behavioral) 10 .79 .79
CASSC (Cognitive) 14 .69 .70
ATCS (Raub Attitude Toward Computer Scale) 8 .87 .88
E-MAIL 11 .95 .96
Scale Preservice Faculty Average
 n=151 n=34
I (Knezek & Miyashita Importance) .77 .67 .76
J (Knezek & Miyashita Enjoyment) .81 .60 .76
Anxiety (Knezek & Miyashita Anxiety) .91 .85 .89
CASA (Loyd & Gressard Anxiety) .91 .84 .89
CASC (Loyd & Gressard Confidence) .70 .75 .75
CASU (Loyd & Gressard Liking) .85 .86 .87
CASU (Loyd & Gressard Usefulness) .81 .77 .81
REL (Pelgrum & Plomp Relevance) .79 .81 .80
ENJ (Pelgrum & Plomp Enjoyment) .88 .94 .90
CA (Compater Anxiety) .94 .95 .95
U (Utility) .82 .74 .81
MD (Male Domain) .79 .89 .82
S (Success) .79 .85 .80
NI (Negative Impact) .79 .72 .76
MOT (Motivation) .81 .81 .81
PI (Productivity Importance) .81 .86 .85
CUQ (Computer Use Questionnaire) .65 .77 .72
CSS (Computer Survey Scale) .63 .61 .66
ATC (Francis Attitude Toward Computers) .90 .90 .91
KS (Kay CAM Student) .77 .88 .85
KSD (Kay CAM Semantic Differential) .92 .95 .93
KT (Kay CAM Teacher) .87 .86 .89
CARSA (Technical Capability) .68 .67 .70
CARSB (Appeal of learning aboal using
computers) .74 .56 .72
CARSC (Being controlled by computers) .49 .57 .55
CARSD (Learning computer skills) .61 .44 .59
CARSE (Traits to overcame anxiety) .32 .58 .47
CASSA (Affective) .93 .93 .93
CASSB (Behavioral) .81 .81 .80
CASSC (Cognitive) .63 .60 .64
ATCS (Raub Attitude Toward Computer Scale) .86 .87 .87
E-MAIL .94 .92 .94
Scale Original
I (Knezek & Miyashita Importance) .82 [#]
J (Knezek & Miyashita Enjoyment) .82 [#]
Anxiety (Knezek & Miyashita Anxiety) .84 [#]
CASA (Loyd & Gressard Anxiety) .80 [*] .90 [^]
CASC (Loyd & Gressard Confidence) .86 [*] .89 [^]
CASU (Loyd & Gressard Liking) .85 [*] .89 [^]
CASU (Loyd & Gressard Usefulness) .82 [^]
REL (Pelgrum & Plomp Relevance) .64 [**]
ENJ (Pelgrum & Plomp Enjoyment) .73 [**]
CA (Compater Anxiety)
U (Utility)
MD (Male Domain)
S (Success)
NI (Negative Impact)
MOT (Motivation)
PI (Productivity Importance)
CUQ (Computer Use Questionnaire) .66 [*]
CSS (Computer Survey Scale) .56 [*]
ATC (Francis Attitude Toward Computers) .96 [+]
KS (Kay CAM Student) .73 [++]
KSD (Kay CAM Semantic Differential) .88 [++]
KT (Kay CAM Teacher) .77 [++]
CARSA (Technical Capability)
CARSB (Appeal of learning aboal using
computers)
CARSC (Being controlled by computers)
CARSD (Learning computer skills)
CARSE (Traits to overcame anxiety)
CASSA (Affective) .95 [n]
CASSB (Behavioral) .71 [n]
CASSC (Cognitive) .88 [n]
ATCS (Raub Attitude Toward Computer Scale) .87
E-MAIL .81 [+]
(*.)Woodrow, 1992
(^.)Loyd & Gressard, 1986
(#.)Knezek & Miyashita, 1994
(n.)Jones & Clarke, 1994
(++.)Kay, 1993 'D'Souza, 1992
(+.)Francis, 1993
(**.)Pelgrum & Plomp, 1993
 Top Nine of 32 Attitudinal Scales
Scale Avg # Items
 Alpha
CA .95 20
E-mail .94 11
CAM .93 10
CASSA .93 15
ATC .91 16
ENJ .90 9
KT .89 5
Anxiety .89 8
CASA .89 9
COPYRIGHT 2000 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2000, Gale Group. All rights reserved. Gale Group is a Thomson Corporation Company.

 Reader Opinion

Title:

Comment:



 

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:KNEZEK, GERALD
Publication:Journal of Technology and Teacher Education
Article Type:Statistical Data Included
Date:Dec 22, 2000
Words:1927
Previous Article:Problem-Based Learning as a Multimedia Design Framework in Teacher Education [*].
Next Article:Where Do You Stand to Get a Good View of Pedagogy?
Topics:


Related Articles
Attitudinal and perceptual correlates of employment status among African Americans with disabilities.
Measuring Knowledge of Technology Usage and Stages of Concern About Computing: A Study of Middle School Teachers.
Computer Technology Training for Prospective Teachers: Computer Attitudes and Perceived Self-Efficacy.
Improving teachers of minority students' attitudes towards and knowledge of standardized tests. (The scholarship of teaching and learning).
Personality indicators and emergency permit teachers' willingness to embrace technology.
A motor vehicle safety scale for young drivers.
Computer attitude and achievement: is time an intermediate variable?
Preservice teachers self-assessment using technology: determining what is worthwhile and looking for changes in daily teaching and learning practices.

Terms of use | Copyright © 2014 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters