Abstract. The Grit scale is a popular measure of achievement-striving behavior. Consisting of two subscales, Consistency of Interests (CI) and Perseverance of Effort (PE), this scale has been repeatedly demonstrated to have high reliability and validity. At the same time, an increasing number of studies explicitly report a low correlation between the subscales and distinct patterns of associations with external measures that each subscale forms. We explored whether there is psychometric evidence that a substantive single grit construct underlies the scale. To answer this question, we investigated the scale structure in a more robust framework than the classical test theory and factor analyses could previously provide. The Russian version of the Grit scale was developed and implemented on a representative sample of high school students ( n = 2,269), and different models of item response theory (IRT), both unidimensional and multidimensional, were compared to find the best fitting model. The results confirmed that the subscales reflect related but independent constructs rather than the whole grit construct. The psychometric properties of the subscales were analyzed with the two-dimensional Partial Credit Model. Both subscales of the Russian version of the Grit scale are unidimensional, have good psychometric properties, and can be used to estimate respondents’ ability.

Previous work has already established the reliability and validity of the Grit scale, based on the classical test theory (Duckworth, Peterson, Matthews, & Kelly, 2007). This study tests the psychometric properties and the dimensionality of the scale by employing an IRT analysis of data collected from a Russian sample of 3383 15 year-old students (Study 1). The results showed that the Grit Scale is two-dimensional, but unlike the early results, both the Consistency of Interests and Perseverance of Effort subscales are quite separate measures for different traits. The construct validation (Study 2) included a retest of the obtained internal structure of the scale via CFA, and a determination of whether two subscales show reasonable patterns of correlations with external measures. Collectively, the data supports the reliability and the validity of both subscales as separate measures.JEL Classification: Z.

Previous research has proved the concept mapping is an effective tool to evaluate knowledge structure, but usually the concept mapping served to foster and trace individual progress in specific field of knowledge. No attention was paid to identifying or verifying the formal indicators of concept maps or their sensitiveness to the level of competence in a specific field of knowledge. However it will make possible to use concept mapping as a standardized tool. In the current study some possible indicators are suggested based on concept maps of experts (n=4) and novices (n=9) in the field of data analysis. Experts and Received in July 2017 Anastasiya Kapuza and Kseniya Vergeles worked on the article within the framework of the Basic Research Program of the National Research University Higher School of Economics, using the subsidy allocated as part of the 5-100 Project, which provides government support for leading Russian universities (translated from Russian by A. Perova).

No abstract

He is teaching conceptual physics courses for pre-service physics teachers, and his research interests are focused on concept learning. In his research he uses and develops network methods and approaches for science education research.