The theoretical construction and measurement of writing self-efficacy

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorMitchell, Kim M.
dc.contributor.examiningcommitteeLobchuk, Michelle M. (Nursing)en_US
dc.contributor.examiningcommitteeNickel, Nathan C. (Community Health Sciences)en_US
dc.contributor.examiningcommitteeWatson, Roger (University of Hull, UK)en_US
dc.contributor.supervisorMcMillan, Diana E. (Nursing)en_US
dc.date.accessioned2020-11-12T21:04:29Z
dc.date.available2020-11-12T21:04:29Z
dc.date.copyright2020-11-12
dc.date.issued2020-09en_US
dc.date.submitted2020-09-29T18:25:20Zen_US
dc.date.submitted2020-11-12T19:19:05Zen_US
dc.date.submitted2020-11-12T20:23:02Zen_US
dc.degree.disciplineNursingen_US
dc.degree.levelDoctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.)en_US
dc.description.abstractBackground: Existing writing self-efficacy instruments have focused on assessing writing self-efficacy through examining mechanical and process features of writing to the neglect of the situated context and its influence. Purpose: The purpose of this thesis was to theoretically construct the concept of writing self-efficacy from a cognitive and socially constructed perspective and then measure writing self-efficacy from within the discipline of nursing. The initial phase required exploring the epistemological compatibility of self-efficacy theory and social constructionism. The culmination of this work was a multiphase multimethod project to develop and test the Situated Academic Writing Self-Efficacy Scale (SAWSES) based on Bandura’s self-efficacy theory and a model of socially constructed writing. The thesis presents five individual papers by publication – two published and three submitted for publication. Methods: Four independent sample studies were conducted. Two studies formed the tool editing phase: a Delphi panel with 7 nursing and 8 writing scholars and Cognitive interviews with 20 undergraduate students. Study validation required two sample recruitments. Study 1 surveyed 255 nursing students examining exploratory factor analysis and a structural equation model. To enhance generalizability, Study 2 surveyed an interdisciplinary sample of undergraduate (N = 543) and graduate students (N = 264) to conduct a multi-group confirmatory factor analysis. Results: The three identified factors present a structure to the questionnaire which is developmental and has the potential to detect gaps in student self-assessed ability to master various facets of disciplinary writing: 1) Factor 1 – Writing Essentials (synthesis, emotional control, language); 2) Factor 2 – Relational-Reflective – assesses relationship building with writing facilitators (teachers, academic sources) and the self through reflection; and 3) Factor 3 – Writing Identity – explores gaps in student achievement of transformative writing (creativity, voice, and disciplinary identity), where confidence can help identify the most engaged writers. Structural equation model procedures identified that writing apprehension and supportive environment were the strongest predictors of SAWSES scores. Conclusions: Findings from these studies support reliability and validity for SAWSES. SAWSES will offer educators a validated tool to research student writing self-efficacy, stimulate student reflection on writing, and significantly inform writing pedagogy.en_US
dc.description.noteFebruary 2021en_US
dc.identifier.citationMitchell, K. M. (2018). Constructing writing practices in nursing. Journal of Nursing Education, 57(7), 399-407. https://doi.org/10.3928/01484834-20180618-04en_US
dc.identifier.citationMitchell, K.M., McMillan, D.E., & Lobchuk, M.M. (2019). Applying the “social turn” in writing scholarship to perspectives on writing self-efficacy. Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education,15(2019). http://journal.aldinhe.ac.uk/index.php/jldhe/article/view/512/pdfen_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1993/35135
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.rightsopen accessen_US
dc.subjectWritingen_US
dc.subjectWriting self-efficacyen_US
dc.subjectInstrument validationen_US
dc.subjectmeasurementen_US
dc.subjectDelphi methoden_US
dc.subjectCognitive Interviewsen_US
dc.subjectFactor Analysisen_US
dc.subjectConfirmatory factor analysisen_US
dc.subjectMulti-group factor analysisen_US
dc.subjectQualitative researchen_US
dc.subjectMixed-Methods Researchen_US
dc.subjectWriting as a method of inquiryen_US
dc.subjectCritical reflectionen_US
dc.subjectWriting pedagogyen_US
dc.subjectConstructive realismen_US
dc.subjectWriting as ontologyen_US
dc.subjectSocial constructionismen_US
dc.subjectNursing educationen_US
dc.subjectSurvey researchen_US
dc.subjectNursing studentsen_US
dc.subjectInterdisciplinary studentsen_US
dc.subjectPost-secondary educationen_US
dc.subjectGraduate educationen_US
dc.subjectSituative perspectivesen_US
dc.subjectRhetorical Genre Theoryen_US
dc.subjectActivity Theoryen_US
dc.subjectCommunities of Practiceen_US
dc.subjectContent analysisen_US
dc.subjectHypothesis testingen_US
dc.subjectStructural Equation Modelsen_US
dc.subjectLatent Variable Analysisen_US
dc.subjectSocial Cognitive Theoryen_US
dc.subjectSelf-Efficacy Theoryen_US
dc.subjectWriting contexten_US
dc.subjectRelational pedagogiesen_US
dc.subjectWriting identityen_US
dc.subjectCreativityen_US
dc.subjectWriting emotionsen_US
dc.subjectR Statisticsen_US
dc.subjectWriting processen_US
dc.titleThe theoretical construction and measurement of writing self-efficacyen_US
dc.typedoctoral thesisen_US
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Mitchell_Kim M.pdf
Size:
7.34 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
license.txt
Size:
2.2 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed to upon submission
Description:
Download
Collections
FGS - Electronic Theses and Practica